Thread Subject: Re: revision of 24(e)

Note

This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.

From: Dave Singer
Date: Wed, Jan 03 2007 4:00 PM

At 17:22 -0500 3/01/07, Karen Peltz Strauss wrote:
>How about this - it is simple and to the point:
>
>A method shall exist for the user to turn closed captions or audio
>descriptions on and off. This shall not be necessary when captions or
>descriptions are permanently visible or audible to everyone.

pretty well where we were before, no?

"Audio descriptions and captions must be either (a) permanently
presented to all recipients ("open") or (b) capable of being turned
on and off by each individual recipient ("closed")."

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Andrew Kirkpatrick" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>To: "TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 5:09 PM
>Subject: Re: [teitac-video] revision of 24(e)
>
>
>> I'm not invested in the language (although people understand
>> "equivalents" I think) - what do you think about it being flipped to say
>> effectively:
>> "cc/ad should be on when the user opens the media, unless there is an
>> easy way to turn them on"?
>>
>> AWK
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Larry
>> Goldberg
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 5:00 PM
>> To: TEITAC AV list
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] revision of 24(e)
>>
>> I fear that this new verbiage introduces too many new terms and words
>> that people aren't used to and won't understand; i.e. " Equivalents," "
>> audible or visible (respectively) by default," " unless a mechanism ...
>> exists."
>>
>> Also, I feel we need to address Dave's point about equal level of
>> end-user requirements to gain access. It's very easy to imagine an
>> implementation of closed captioning that seems facile (and even cool!)
>> to the developer but which requires a specific browser of a specific
>> version, with a specific plug-in or set of plug-ins.
>>
>> Maybe we should just require that all video be open-captioned and
>> open-described...
>>
>> [just kidding] [sort of]
>>
>> - Larry
>>
>>
>> Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:
>>
>>> Here's another way to skin this:
>>>
>>> Original:Display or presentation of alternate text presentation or
>>> audio descriptions shall be user-selectable unless permanent
>>>
>>> Proposed: Equivalents for video and audio shall be audible or visible
>>> (respectively) by default, unless a mechanism to enable the display
>>> exists.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Dave Singer
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 3:59 PM
>>> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] revision of 24(e)
>>>
>>> The problem with removing "permanent" and saying something like
>>> "available to everyone" is that the definition of "available" is very
>>> vague ('oh yes, it's available, you just need to pay for this premium
>>> service, buy this tool, and then ...').
>>>
>>> The intent is that the entire caption stream or audio stream be
>>> presented without user intervention.
>>>
>>> The other comment I made was that this should say something about the
>>> end-user requirements to be able to turn captions on and off should
>>> not be materially different or more onerous than to recieve the basic
>>> program material ('you don't need a special television').
>>> --
>>> David Singer
>>> Apple Computer/QuickTime
>>>

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University