Thread Subject: Re: No meeting today - PLEASE REVIEW JULY 6 DRAFT

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: Larry Goldberg
Date: Fri, Jul 13 2007 2:20 PM

Paul raises some important points here, which I will respond to interspersed
below. I don't believe we will be able to settle these issues right here and
now and can raise them again, as we did at the last face-to-face.
Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend the meetings in DC next week, so
will not be able to press my case on the issue Paul raises below. Tony
Jasionowski, also from Panasonic, will be leading the AV subcommittee
discussion and I am confident he and other members of the subcommittee will
give a fair hearing to all sides of these last remaining issues:


Schomburg, Paul wrote:

> 4-A - Caption Playback
> Comments:
>
> 1. In the second box, please note that the following devices may not
> contain display capabilities, and thus must either pass the data to a
> DTV display or decode the data and pass an open-captioned signal to the
> DTV display or monitor:
>
> * Stand-alone DTV tuners, whether or not they are marketed with
> display screens
> * Computer equipment that includes DTV receiver or display
> circuitry
>
> In addition, videotape (VCR) or DVD source devices cannot provide
> CEA-708 data. Therefore these source devices should not be included in
> this section.

Videotape is indeed mentioned and certainly today's VHS tapes cannot support
708 data. But the section does not refer to either VCR or VHS - it says
videotape and if a tape format becomes available that can support 708 data
playback, it should (professional grade tape indeed can do just that).

As for DVD, this continues to be a bone of contention. It is appearing more
and more like the original oversight of not having support of caption data
in the first generation of DVD players has been repeated in the new
generation (BluRay and HD-DVD). That situation may yet be rectified, as it
was in the early days of DVD (without FCC requirements or pressure - this
was a private industry fix made by the standards bodies and manufacturers).

So while it is true that 708 cannot be supported in the existing DVD format,
the future is unclear about BluRay, HD-DVD and other future video source
devices.


> I suggest the following changes:
>
> * Wide-screen (16:9) digital television (DTV) displays measuring
> at least 7.8 inches vertically
> * DTV sets with conventional (4:3) displays measuring at least 13
> inches diagonally
> * Stand-alone DTV tuners, whether or not they are marketed with
> display screens
> * Computer equipment that includes DTV receiver or display
> circuitry
>
> CEA 708
>
> Receive, decode and display digital video signals
>
> * broadcast
> * cable
> * satellite
> * IPTV
>
> OR
>
> * Decode data, when available, and pass an open-captioned signal
> to the DTV display or monitor

That's how it works with cable and satellite set-top boxes (passing through
an open-captioned signal) and that should work as well in the way Paul
indicates above. Agreed.


> 2. We cannot agree with a requirement to require decoding of CEA-708 in
> devices that are not currently required to do so by FCC rules. As a
> compromise, however, I suggest that we add "or functional equivalent" to
> the middle box as below. I also strongly object to calling out specific
> product brand names. These requirements should apply to all digital
> video source devices, such as PCs, and should not be aimed at a select
> technology or product category. All digital video source devices should
> have similar requirements to provide captions when used to play video
> content on a DTV display or monitor.

FCC rules do not govern 508 rules. If they did, then we shouldn't be
requiring 608 caption data playback on conventional DVDs (see first box) and
yet we do and have for years. So a 508 requirement for 708 support in the
new DVD formats isn't determined by FCC rules. The questions is, do we want
to do so?

As for "calling out specific products names," Paul means using "BluRay" and
"HD-DVD" - but is this so different than saying "DVD" above? If we don't say
those names specifically, how will procurement agents know what we are
talking about. If we say vaguely "video source devices" only, does that
cover other equipment that other manufacturers will object to. How about an
iPod or an iPhone? They are video source devices and can neither decode nor
pass on 708 data? Should they?

> * Other digital video source devices
>
> CEA 708 or
> functional equivalent
>
> * Pass data, when available, to the caption decoding circuitry of
> DTV displays
>
> OR
>
> * Decode data, when available, and pass an open-captioned signal
> to the DTV display or monitor

Using "functional equivalent" language with defining what the functions are,
in detail, leaves a wide open hole for all kinds of experimental ways of
displaying text. Do we want that?

>
> 3. CEA-708 is a very extensive standard, and the FCC does not require
> DTV receivers to implement all of its features. I think the TETIAC
> guidelines should defer to the FCC rules which define the sections of
> CEA-708 that devices must support. Perhaps just a footnote is needed to
> clarify this.

It is true that, for instance, the 708 standard has provisions for up to 63
caption channels per program (!) while the FCC rules require only 6. We can
and should point to the subsection of 708 that the FCC mandates for support
within DTV tuners and STBs. A footnote could refer to:

FCC Docket 00-259
Adopted: July 21, 2000
Released: July 31, 2000

In the Matter of

Closed Captioning Requirements for
Digital Television Receivers

Closed Captioning and Video Description of Video Programming, Implementation
of Section 305 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Video Programming
Accessibility


> 6.3-E - Interactive Elements
This section was not written by our subcommittee so I can't comment on the
intent of the authors.

And with that, I'm off on vacation for a week - good luck!

- Larry


>
> All materials containing interactive elements that are part of the
> content must comply with 1194.21 [a-z] as well as 1194.24 a-e.
>
> Comments:
>
> 1. I think a definition of an "interactive element" is needed for this
> section.
>
>
>
> 2. A concern with Sec 6.3-E that is more of a question: Is the intent
> here to impose all of the web/software requirements currently being
> discussed onto consumer electronic video playback devices? My concern
> is that this could potentially prohibit a whole class of devices, such
> as DVD players, from government use. For example, DVDs authored with
> talking menus could be considered to contain "interactive elements", but
> I am not sure if these would fully comply with the requirements of
> 1194.21 today? Since the web/software section is intended to primarily
> address PCs, I am really apprehensive that these requirements may not be
> able to be met by consumer-grade media players. I think this area
> requires more discussion.
>
>
>
> Thanks, Paul
>
>
>
> Paul G. Schomburg, Sr. Manager
>
> Tel: (202) 912-3800 x114; Cell: (202) 550-2230
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Larry
> Goldberg
> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 10:45 AM
> To: TEITAC AV list
> Subject: [teitac-video] No meeting today - PLEASE REVIEW JULY 6 DRAFT
> Importance: High
>
>
>
> In case you were wondering, we will not be conducting an AV Subcommittee
> meeting today.
>
>
>
> But in anticipation of next week's face-to-face meeting in DC (Tony
> Jasionowski of Panasonic will lead our presentation; I will be unable to
> attend), I would like to ask the subcommittee members to look at and act
> on the following:
>
>
>
> 1) Review the July 6th version of the TEITAC draft guidelines and
> provide comments on which provisions are still open and/or unresolved.
> Comments should be sent to this e-mail list as it seems an easier way -
> they can be posted to the Wiki later if we need to make any changes.
>
>
>
> Here are the 4 sections we need to look at:
>
>
>
> A) Subpart A Definitions
>
> http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_July_6_Subpart_A#Section_1194.4_Definit
> ions
>
>
>
> Geoff Freed uploaded the following comment/definitions which I believe
> we have all agreed to and should not reopen unless there is a dire need:
>
>
>
> " The AV working group has agreed to the following definitions:
>
> Section 1194.4 Definitions:
>
> CAPTIONS:
>
> Captions are synchronized text equivalents for audio information.
> Captions are similar to subtitles in that they convey the content of
> spoken dialogue, but also include text for non-spoken information such
> as important sound effects, music, laughter, and speaker identification
> and location. Captions should not obscure or obstruct relevant or key
> information. In some countries captions are called subtitles.
>
>
>
> VIDEO DESCRIPTIONS:
>
> The insertion of audio intended to reveal important visual details that
> are not contained or that cannot be understood from the main audio
> output alone.
>
> Video descriptions supplement the regular audio track of the program and
> are usually inserted into pauses in the dialog or narration to provide
> information about actions, characters and on-screen text that appears
> without verbalization. Video descriptions are a way to let people who
> are blind, visually impaired or cannot otherwise see the screen know
> what is happening on the screen."
>
>
>
> B) 2.4.4. Additional Provisions for Audio-Visual Content or
> Players/Displays
>
>
>
> http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_July_6_Provisions_Only#4._Additional_Pr
> ovisions_for_Audio-Visual_Content_or_Players.2FDisplays
>
>
>
> C) 2.6 6. Electronic Content Provisions/2.6.2.2 6.2-B - Multimedia
> (Format)
>
>
>
> http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_July_6_Provisions_Only#6.2-B_-_Multimed
> ia_28Format.29
>
>
>
> D) 2.6.3 If Audio and/or Video Content...
>
> - Synchronized Alternatives
>
> - Captions and Transcripts
>
> - Video Description and Full Text Equivalents
>
> - Open or Closed Captions/Descriptions
>
>
>
> http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_July_6_Provisions_Only#.5B6.3.5D_If_Aud
> io_and.2For_Video_Content
>
>
>
>
>
> 2) Any suggestions as to what Tony should present next week at the
> face-to-face.
>
>
>
> We are coming down to the wire - so get your comments to the list ASAP
> (the committee chairs are looking for final comments this week).
>
>
>
> - Larry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

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