W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 1999

Use of the term "synchronized equivalent"

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:12:57 -0500
Message-ID: <3842B419.5F6D291B@w3.org>
To: w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Al, Daniel,

At the 24 November UAGL teleconf [1], I was given an action
item to propose to this WG the adoption of the term "synchronized
equivalent" or "synchronized alternative" (proposed by Eric Hansen in
instead of the term used in the last call draft [2], 
"continuous equivalent (track)".

There is some precedent for the new term. From WCAG 1.1, checkpoint 1.4:

  1.4 For any time-based multimedia presentation (e.g.,
      a movie or animation), synchronize equivalent
      alternatives (e.g., captions or auditory descriptions of the
      visual track) with the presentation.

The term "continuous equivalent track" first appears in the SMIL
Access Note [4].

Please let the UAGL WG know if the term "synchronized equivalent"
accurately describes captions, auditory descriptions, or other
alternative formats that must be synchronized with an audio or
video track.

Thank you,

 - Ian

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999OctDec/0426.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-WAI-USERAGENT-19991105/
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/SMIL-access/
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999OctDec/0337.html

Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel/Fax:                     +1 212 684-1814
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 29 November 1999 12:13:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:38:24 UTC