E-mail List Archives
Thread: Podcasting and Accessibility
Number of posts in this thread: 22 (In chronological order)
From: Joni K Allison
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 7:30AM
Subject: Podcasting and Accessibility
No previous message | Next message →
At the University of Louisville, we have growing interest in podcasting
and other "mobile learning" ventures. Is anyone currently working with
podcasting and if so, how are you addressing accessibility issues?
Thank you!
Joni K. Allison
Assistant Director
Delphi Center for Teaching and Learning
University of Louisville
Office (502) 852-8565
Fax (502) 852-0393
Visit us on the web at
http://delphi.louisville.edu
From: Michael R. Burks
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 8:15AM
Subject: RE: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
EASI is doing webcasts on Podcasting,
The second one is on Feb 9 at They can still make the second one.
They using podcasting in a very different way than most people think of
podcasting.
http://easi.cc/forms/podcast2.htm
Sincerely,
Mike Burks
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 10:15AM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Joni K Allison wrote:
> At the University of Louisville, we have growing interest in podcasting
> and other "mobile learning" ventures. Is anyone currently working with
> podcasting and if so, how are you addressing accessibility issues?
Not doing any podcasting work directly, but unless I'm missing
something: it's an audio file, so you should at least provide a text
transcript. Using something like SMIL, where text is synchronised with
the audio, would be even better.
--
Patrick H. Lauke
___________
re
From: Karl Groves
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 10:30AM
Subject: RE: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
>
From: Michael R. Burks
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 10:45AM
Subject: RE: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
I believe it is an MP3 file to be exact.
Sincerely,
Mike Burks
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 11:30AM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Karl Groves wrote:
> Do you have any information about whether SMIL is supported by portable
> audio devices?
SMIL is only a container for other file formats...so you'd still have an
mp3 file (which plays in the portable devices), but also a SMIL that
combines the mp3 with a suitable caption file. The SMIL may not be
playable on the device, but can be used on a regular computer.
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
___________
re
From: Karl Groves
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 12:00PM
Subject: RE: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
>
From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 12:15PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Just as an aside:Are Podcasts themselves really mis-sold(if sold is the
right term) by the likes of Apple etc? So it can be a new "thing" to get excited about.
They really are just any pre-recorded audio (whether
your own radio show, playlist collections) that can be streamed.
I would suggest its all just hype.
Juxtapose the word Pod with any techno sounding "buzz word" and off we go.
Josh
Joshue O Connor
Web Accessibility Consultant
**Centre for Inclusive Technology (CFIT)* *
National Council for the Blind of Ireland
Website:http://www.cfit.ie
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Tel: +353 1 8821915
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> On 2/1/06, Karl Groves < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
>>I might be splitting hairs a little bit, but as I understand it, "podcasts"
>>are intended to be viewed/ listened to on portable devices such as i-pods..
>
>
> No, you're wrong. Podcasts aren't intended only for mobile devices.
> The name is a misnomer and many people listen to podcasts on laptop
> and desktop computers.
>
> (Before you even start to think about the accessibility of podcasts on
> portable devices, you first have to address the accessibility of the
> portable devices themselves, of course.)
>
> --Kynn
>
>
>
>
>
From: Karl Groves
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 12:30PM
Subject: RE: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
>
> On 2/1/06, Karl Groves < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > I might be splitting hairs a little bit, but as I
> understand it, "podcasts"
> > are intended to be viewed/ listened to on portable devices
> such as i-pods.
>
> No, you're wrong. Podcasts aren't intended only for mobile devices.
> The name is a misnomer and many people listen to podcasts on
> laptop and desktop computers.
I understand. In fact, I listen to several podcasts on my computer without
ever putting them on my I-pod. However, the OP *did* say "mobile learning".
-Karl
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 12:45PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
On 2/1/06, Karl Groves < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I might be splitting hairs a little bit, but as I understand it, "podcasts"
> are intended to be viewed/ listened to on portable devices such as i-pods.
No, you're wrong. Podcasts aren't intended only for mobile devices.
The name is a misnomer and many people listen to podcasts on laptop
and desktop computers.
(Before you even start to think about the accessibility of podcasts on
portable devices, you first have to address the accessibility of the
portable devices themselves, of course.)
--Kynn
From: Tim Beadle
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 1:00PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
On 01/02/06, Joshue O Connor < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Just as an aside:Are Podcasts themselves really mis-sold(if sold is the
> right term) by the likes of Apple etc? So it can be a new "thing" to get excited about.
Apple didn't invent the term; they did piggyback on its popularity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcasting#Name
> They really are just any pre-recorded audio (whether
> your own radio show, playlist collections) that can be streamed.
Not streamed; downloaded.
> I would suggest its all just hype.
Nope - it's RSS 2.0 with enclosures given an easily-marketable name.
Yes, there was downloadable audio before podcasting; RSS 2.0 with
enclosures (let's say podcasting - it's easier) makes it easy to
subscribe to a regularly-updated show, much in the same way that
'normal' RSS makes keeping up with web site updates much easier.
> Juxtapose the word Pod with any techno sounding "buzz word" and off we go.
It's easy to be cynical ;)
Regards,
Tim
From: Joseph Karr O'Connor
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 1:15PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Joshue O Connor < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
Just as an aside:Are Podcasts themselves really mis-sold(if sold is the
right term) by the likes of Apple etc? So it can be a new "thing" to
get excited about.
Joshue,
ROTFL! Our local Apple rep was here the other day extolling the
magnificent educational benefits of Podcasting. Of course, what he was
pushing was Apple as the distributor of our content. We can have Apple
authenticate our users through iTunes, and deliver lectures that way.
When I mentioned the fact that we'd be doing transcripts of the
lectures, citing a lack of labor, he said "would you stand in the way of
new technology?" over an issue like that? I WOULD! Unless all of our
students have access to new course materials, then no students will have
access to new course materials.
There's no way to display a SMIL layer on an MP3 player. If targeting a
video capable iPod you could deliver open captioned video, but that
wouldn't be an audio stream per se and only a very small minority of
users have video iPods.
No, you'd have to make a transcript available in text and stream it in a
SMIL layer. At the very least, you'd have to make a transcript
available. That way users could access the transcripts via screen
reader. But lectures are not always just the instructor speaking, there
are questions from the students, and interchanges between instructor and
student. This would make for complicated transcripts = labor.
I told the Apple rep that I need a software solution for transcriptions.
Of course, that solution is still a few years away.
Then there is recording the lectures. You'd need sound support with
audience mics and a body mic for the lecturer or it'll be awful audio.
My initial foray into Podcasting will be to make selected lectures
available to the public, not making them part of course work, and
providing transcripts of those lectures. I'll select notable lecturers
on various topics I feel the public would like to experience. This is a
good way to open up our process to the public while making the lectures
available to all users.
--
Joseph Karr O'Connor
Manager University Web Communications
California State University Northridge
818-677-7917
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 2:00PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Karl Groves wrote:
> I might be splitting hairs a little bit, but as I understand it, "podcasts"
> are intended to be viewed/ listened to on portable devices such as i-pods.
> In fact, the OP's post stated "we have growing interest in podcasting and
> other "mobile learning" ventures. " - "mobile" being the operative word
> leading to my question about SMIL support by portable audio devices.
Hang on. If we're talking purely about "portable audio devices", of
course there's no way to make them accessible (to deaf/hard of hearing
users). Also, I'm not suggesting that SMIL should be used exclusively.
The podcast can still remain an MP3 (and be encapsulated via RSS 2.0 or
whatever), but for access reasons a text transcript and/or SMIL should
be made available in parallel to it.
> I think your recommendation of SMIL was an excellent one - IF - the OP also
> places those MP3 files on the web site.
Which he'd have to do anyway, even if providing the podcast in an RSS
2.0 file...as that only references those external files, and they need
to be hosted on a web server...
--
Patrick H. Lauke
___________
re
From: Jennifer Sutton
Date: Wed, Feb 01 2006 2:30PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi all:
I've been following podcasting fairly closely, and I'll just toss out
a few points for consideration:
1. Has anybody tried iTunes with a screen reader? It's not pretty,
and it's not even pretty on a Mac with VoiceOver (or so I hear). So,
if you've got blind screen reader users who work on the Windows
platform, they need Juice. And a very accessible app. it is, thanks
to a lot of work by the blind community, and a commitment from the
app.'s original developer.
As far as I can tell, Mac and Linux users who are blind frequently
roll their own scripts to "get" content, running it as a "chron
job." There are some open source app.s (pumped up scripts) floating
around, but that's a bit out of my league.
2. Since podcasts are often (but not always) mp3s, they can be
played on a range of playback devices, but bravo to you, Kynn, for
pointing out the need for accessible players. DAISY players that use
Flash cards are one option to keep in mind.
3. Synchronizing an audio file with text, via SMIL, after the fact
would, I think, be rather a tricky business. Has anybody tried it
with a DAISY production tool?
4. Podcasts are all about the subscribing and not about the medium,
or that's what I believe. As someone (Tim?) said, RSS 2.0 with
enclosures is the key (what makes this new, not just hype), and a
fantastic development it is, or can be.
5. I find it interesting that, on WebAIM, nobody's brought up the
issue of Web accessibility and podcasting, yet. Or did I miss it?
Some of what's being built to support podcasters and podcast
listeners needs some SERIOUS help i.e. Web applications, Web sites, and so on.
Joe Amateur, who is just podcasting from his basement probably won't
be able to learn and implement Web standards, but there are plenty of
podcasters with technical skill. At least many podcasts come from
blogs, and depending upon how people configure their blogging
software, sites can be fairly easy to negotiate with a screen
reader. But I don't want to imply that accessibility equates to ONLY
screen reader users, by any means.
I hope some of my thinking may prove useful.
Best,
Jennifer
From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 3:00AM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
> If we're talking purely about "portable audio devices", of
>> course there's no way to make them accessible (to deaf/hard of hearing
>> users).
I have a colleague, Stuart Lawler in the National Council For the Blind of Ireland,
who is blind and mad about all things related to audio.
He has been raving about a piece of software called Rockbox that he uses with the
Archos. It can also be used on iRiver devices.
I haven't had a chance to look at it but for anyone interested its at:
http://www.rockbox.org/
Josh
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
> Karl Groves wrote:
>
>> I might be splitting hairs a little bit, but as I understand it,
>> "podcasts"
>> are intended to be viewed/ listened to on portable devices such as
>> i-pods.
>> In fact, the OP's post stated "we have growing interest in podcasting and
>> other "mobile learning" ventures. " - "mobile" being the operative word
>> leading to my question about SMIL support by portable audio devices.
>
>
> Hang on. If we're talking purely about "portable audio devices", of
> course there's no way to make them accessible (to deaf/hard of hearing
> users). Also, I'm not suggesting that SMIL should be used exclusively.
> The podcast can still remain an MP3 (and be encapsulated via RSS 2.0 or
> whatever), but for access reasons a text transcript and/or SMIL should
> be made available in parallel to it.
>
>> I think your recommendation of SMIL was an excellent one - IF - the OP
>> also
>> places those MP3 files on the web site.
>
>
> Which he'd have to do anyway, even if providing the podcast in an RSS
> 2.0 file...as that only references those external files, and they need
> to be hosted on a web server...
>
From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 3:15AM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Tim,
>>I would suggest its all just hype.
>
>
> Nope - it's RSS 2.0 with enclosures given an easily-marketable name.
> Yes, there was downloadable audio before podcasting; RSS 2.0 with
> enclosures (let's say podcasting - it's easier) makes it easy to
> subscribe to a regularly-updated show, much in the same way that
> 'normal' RSS makes keeping up with web site updates much easier.
>
Thanks for that. I am more the wiser now :)
>
>>> Juxtapose the word Pod with any techno sounding "buzz word" and off we go..
>
>
> It's easy to be cynical ;)
>
It sure is!!
Cheers
Josh
Tim Beadle wrote:
> On 01/02/06, Joshue O Connor < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
>>Just as an aside:Are Podcasts themselves really mis-sold(if sold is the
>>right term) by the likes of Apple etc? So it can be a new "thing" to get excited about.
>
>
> Apple didn't invent the term; they did piggyback on its popularity.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcasting#Name
>
>
>>They really are just any pre-recorded audio (whether
>>your own radio show, playlist collections) that can be streamed.
>
>
> Not streamed; downloaded.
>
>
>>I would suggest its all just hype.
>
>
> Nope - it's RSS 2.0 with enclosures given an easily-marketable name.
> Yes, there was downloadable audio before podcasting; RSS 2.0 with
> enclosures (let's say podcasting - it's easier) makes it easy to
> subscribe to a regularly-updated show, much in the same way that
> 'normal' RSS makes keeping up with web site updates much easier.
>
>
>>Juxtapose the word Pod with any techno sounding "buzz word" and off we go..
>
>
> It's easy to be cynical ;)
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 3:30AM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Joseph,
> We can have Apple
>> authenticate our users through iTunes, and deliver lectures that way
I am also not sure how accessible iTunes is at all. I have not heard good reports
(from blind users) though that could always improve in future releases, especially
now that Apple have embedded VoiceOver in their OS, and seem committed to improving the
accessibility of their products.
It would be a shame if they didn't go the extra mile and make such a popular application
as iTunes accessible.
Josh
Joshue O Connor
Web Accessibility Consultant
**Centre for Inclusive Technology (CFIT)* *
National Council for the Blind of Ireland
Website:http://www.cfit.ie
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Tel: +353 1 8821915
Joseph Karr O'Connor wrote:
> Joshue O Connor < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Just as an aside:Are Podcasts themselves really mis-sold(if sold is the
> right term) by the likes of Apple etc? So it can be a new "thing" to
> get excited about.
>
> Joshue,
>
> ROTFL! Our local Apple rep was here the other day extolling the
> magnificent educational benefits of Podcasting. Of course, what he was
> pushing was Apple as the distributor of our content. We can have Apple
> authenticate our users through iTunes, and deliver lectures that way.
>
> When I mentioned the fact that we'd be doing transcripts of the
> lectures, citing a lack of labor, he said "would you stand in the way of
> new technology?" over an issue like that? I WOULD! Unless all of our
> students have access to new course materials, then no students will have
> access to new course materials.
>
> There's no way to display a SMIL layer on an MP3 player. If targeting a
> video capable iPod you could deliver open captioned video, but that
> wouldn't be an audio stream per se and only a very small minority of
> users have video iPods.
>
> No, you'd have to make a transcript available in text and stream it in a
> SMIL layer. At the very least, you'd have to make a transcript
> available. That way users could access the transcripts via screen
> reader. But lectures are not always just the instructor speaking, there
> are questions from the students, and interchanges between instructor and
> student. This would make for complicated transcripts = labor.
>
> I told the Apple rep that I need a software solution for transcriptions.
> Of course, that solution is still a few years away.
>
> Then there is recording the lectures. You'd need sound support with
> audience mics and a body mic for the lecturer or it'll be awful audio.
>
> My initial foray into Podcasting will be to make selected lectures
> available to the public, not making them part of course work, and
> providing transcripts of those lectures. I'll select notable lecturers
> on various topics I feel the public would like to experience. This is a
> good way to open up our process to the public while making the lectures
> available to all users.
>
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 10:00AM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Interesting idea:
Podzinger is a Web site which takes podcast feeds, runs voice
recognition over them to produce a full text version of each podcast,
and then provides a full text search capability.
http://www.podzinger.com/
Got this from a friend of mine, who has been podcasting continually
for over a year -- which makes him one of the wizened ancients of
podcasting, according to some.
--Kynn
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 12:45PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> Podzinger is a Web site which takes podcast feeds, runs voice
> recognition over them to produce a full text version of each podcast,
> and then provides a full text search capability.
Where do I get access to the full text? Or is this just something the
site does internally and never exposes the full text it gathered?
--
Patrick H. Lauke
___________
re
From: Juan Ulloa
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 1:00PM
Subject: RE: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
> 5. I find it interesting that, on WebAIM, nobody's brought up the
> issue of Web accessibility and podcasting, yet. Or did I miss it?
Like Jennifer pointed out, it looks like we've been focusing on the
non-web devices (like the i-pod). Most sites that do podcasting well
will also allow users to download each individual file without using the
actual RSS feed. So, for web accessibility purposes, you could simply
add a link to the transcripts of the podcast.
...Which leads me to wonder if you can include the text transcript (or a
link to it) from the podcast? A podcast without the audio is just an
RSS feed, right? So you could technically have a podcast that includes
the RSS feed. Or do you have to keep the podcast (for audio) and the
RSS feed (for text transcripts) separate?
Juan Ulloa
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 1:15PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →
I'm not sure if you can get the full text, which is both a problem and
probably also a feature designed by the podzinger folks -- as there
may be copyright problems in providing a full text transcript.
But it does offer a tantalizing thought about podcast accessibility.
Perhaps if there were a way that podcasts could specifically (via RSS
and license markup?) allow for third-party transcription, this would
be useful?
Of course, machine-generated transcripts will often suck. But they
are a start and some transcription is better than none, usually.
--Kynn
On 2/2/06, Patrick H. Lauke < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Kynn Bartlett wrote:
>
> > Podzinger is a Web site which takes podcast feeds, runs voice
> > recognition over them to produce a full text version of each podcast,
> > and then provides a full text search capability.
>
> Where do I get access to the full text? Or is this just something the
> site does internally and never exposes the full text it gathered?
>
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
> ___________
> re
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Thu, Feb 02 2006 2:00PM
Subject: Re: Podcasting and Accessibility
← Previous message | No next message
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> But it does offer a tantalizing thought about podcast accessibility.
> Perhaps if there were a way that podcasts could specifically (via RSS
> and license markup?) allow for third-party transcription, this would
> be useful?
Yeah, I could see some Creative Commons flag possibly relating to this.
> Of course, machine-generated transcripts will often suck. But they
> are a start and some transcription is better than none, usually.
Definitely. Derek Featherstone and I discussed (gosh, quite a long time
ago) the possibility of speakers at events having a trained version of
Dragon NaturallySpeaking or similar on their laptops during their
presentations, to allow for an instant (rough) transcript that can then
be easily tweaked and uploaded as part of event notes.
--
Patrick H. Lauke
___________
re