Thread Subject: Re: teitac-video Harmonization with WCAG 2.0

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: David Poehlman
Date: Sun, Mar 04 2007 5:15 AM

Hi Lary,

I couldn't agree more and thank you for saying so. I thinkk there
was a similar issue with the first standards set with regard to wcag
1.0 but perhaps for different reasons. I would hope that in our
quest for harmonization that where there is a conflict, we go for the
higher bar keeping achievability and backwards compatibility in mind.

On Mar 3, 2007, at 10:29 PM, Larry Goldberg wrote:

Though I haven't been fully briefed on where the WCAG 2.0 presently
stands
on captioning, I understand there has been sentiment that because of
potential conflicts with either copyright issues or non-English language
capabilities of certain web media platforms, there has been a suggestion
that captioning be dropped from a Level One to a Level Two or Three
requirement.

If that is the case, I would strongly oppose the notion that global
harmonization should trump the strong US stand on mandatory
captioning, and
would also suggest that in this case harmonization with WCAG 2.0 or any
other international standard should be de-emphasized.

The interest in harmonization has been raised repeatedly throughout our
discussions and those of other groups, and it seems that in each case it
would result in the weakening of 508 standards. Harmonization is a
theme,
not a requirement and while companies that do business all over the
world
have legitimate concerns about the need to meet a variety of
standards, this
cannot be an excuse to aim for the lowest common denominator among all
global standards. Our hope is the the best that 508 has to offer can
lift
other countries efforts, not lower our own.

- Larry




Jasionowski, Tony wrote:

> Folks,
> As we previously discussed and agreed within TEITAC regarding
> themes and
> the need for global harmonization I also agree that the WCAG 2.0
> language is a good place to start from rather than from scratch.
> Tony Jasionowski
> Panasonic
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 2:00 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: teitac-video Digest, Vol 6, Issue 2
>
> Send teitac-video mailing list submissions to
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://list.teitac.org/mailman/listinfo/teitac-video
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of teitac-video digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: WCAG 2.0 and audio-video 508 (David Poehlman)
> 2. Re: user-interface accessibility for A/V (Gregg Vanderheiden)
> 3. Re: user-interface accessibility for A/V (Hoffman, Allen)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 15:12:10 -0500
> From: David Poehlman < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] WCAG 2.0 and audio-video 508
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Message-ID:
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> Asside from the biassed language, this is pretty good material to
> work from.. If we are truly multimedia than all modes are equal and
> none are alternative.
>
> On Mar 1, 2007, at 11:32 AM, Sean Hayes wrote:
>
> There are several clauses in WCAG2.0 that deal with media: (see
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#text-equiv) I would wish to see, as
> far as possible, that 508 harmonise with these.
>
>
> Guideline 1.2 Provide synchronized alternatives for multimedia
> Understanding Guideline 1.2
>
> Level 1 Success Criteria for Guideline 1.2
> 1.2.1 Captions: Captions are provided for prerecorded multimedia. How
> to meet 1.2.1
>
> 1.2.2 Audio Desc. or Full Text Alt: Audio description of video, or a
> full text alternative for multimedia including any interaction , is
> provided for prerecorded multimedia. How to meet 1.2.2
>
> Note: For 1.2.2, 1.2.3, and 1.2.7, if all of the information in the
> video track is already provided in the audio track, no audio
> description is necessary. [LC-1224]
>
> Level 2 Success Criteria for Guideline 1.2
> 1.2.3 Audio Desc.: Audio description of video is provided for
> prerecorded multimedia. How to meet 1.2.3
>
> 1.2.4 Live Captions: Captions are provided for live multimedia. How
> to meet 1.2.4
>
> Note: If multimedia is completely computer generated, it is not live
> and is subject to the requirements for pre-recorded multimedia in
> WCAG 2.0. [LC-925]
>
> Level 3 Success Criteria for Guideline 1.2
> 1.2.5 Sign Language: Sign language interpretation is provided for
> multimedia. How to meet 1.2.5
>
> 1.2.6 Extended. Audio Desc.: Extended audio description of video is
> provided for prerecorded multimedia. How to meet 1.2.6
>
> 1.2.7 Full Text Alternative: A full text alternative for multimedia
> including any interaction is provided for all prerecorded multimedia
> [LC-1156] . How to meet 1.2.7
>
>
>
>
> Sean Hayes
> Standards and Policy Team
> Accessible Technology Group
> Microsoft
> Phone:
> mob +44 7977 455002
> office +44 117 9719730
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: geoff freed [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> Sent: 01 March 2007 14:23
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
> Cc: Sean Hayes
> Subject: WCAG 2.0 and audio-video 508
>
>
> On yesterday's telecon Sean mentioned that whatever our subcommittee
> writes should be in line with WCAG 2.0. Sean, can you elaborate?
>
> Thanks.
> Geoff
>
>

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