Thread Subject: Re: Three FundamentalOptionsforcaption issue.

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Thu, Aug 30 2007 8:25 AM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: Larry Goldberg: "Re: Three FundamentalOptionsforcaption issue."
• Previous message in thread: None
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

With you and Allen the list looks like

Larry G - Chair
Sean H
Andrew K
Gregg V
Allen H
Greg F

Anyone else?

(notice Larry that this is hereby transferred back to you - grin)


Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Greg Fields
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 9:09 AM
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee; TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] [teitac-video] Three
> FundamentalOptionsforcaption issue.
>
> Please add myself to the list as we produce our own
> Java-based media player for BlackBerry.
>
> Greg Fields, CUA
> Accessibility Product Manager
> Handheld Product Management
> Research In Motion (RIM)
> Telephone: 1 519 888 7465, ext.3867
> Email: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> URL: http://www.blackberry.com/accessibility
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Hoffman,
> Allen
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 10:01 AM
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee; TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] [teitac-websoftware] Three
> FundamentalOptionsfor caption issue.
>
> Add me to the list please.
>
>
>
> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg
> Vanderheiden
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 9:56 AM
> To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'; 'TEITAC Web/Software
> Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] [teitac-websoftware] Three Fundamental
> Optionsfor caption issue.
>
> Perhaps we should start out with Who and then find a time.
>
>
> >From the call and this email I think there is
>
> Sean,
> Andrew
> Gregg
> Larry
> Others want to volunteer?
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Larry
> > Goldberg
> > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 7:48 AM
> > To: TEITAC AV list; 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-video] [teitac-websoftware] Three Fundamental
> > Optionsfor caption issue.
> >
> > Yes, a sidebar conversation would be useful.
> >
> > Where/when?
> >
> > - Larry
> >
> >
> > Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> >
> > > Good point.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We need a side panel discussion to work out the details.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gregg
> > > -- ------------------------------
> > > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _____
> > >
> > >
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> > Sean Hayes
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 2:55 PM
> > > To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee; 'TEITAC Web/Software
> > Subcommittee'
> > > Subject: Re: [teitac-video] [teitac-websoftware] Three
> Fundamental
> > > Optionsfor caption issue.
> > >
> > > But I'm not sure that would work for a container format (like
> > > Quicktime) which allows third party codecs to be included.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sean Hayes
> > > Incubation Lab
> > > Accessibility Business Unit
> > > Microsoft
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Office: +44 118 909 5867,
> > >
> > > Mobile: +44 7875 091385
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg
> > > Vanderheiden
> > > Sent: 29 August 2007 20:50
> > > To: 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'; 'TEITAC Audio/Video
> > Subcommittee'
> > > Subject: Re: [teitac-video] [teitac-websoftware] Three
> Fundamental
> > > Optionsfor caption issue.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The company/organization that creates the technology
> specifies the
> > > preferred caption format ( or builds it into the technology).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gregg
> > > -- ------------------------------
> > > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _____
> > >
> > >
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> > Behalf Of Sean
> > > Hayes
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 1:59 PM
> > > To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee; 'TEITAC Web/Software
> > Subcommittee'
> > > Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] [teitac-video] Three
> Fundamental
> > > Optionsfor caption issue.
> > >
> > > I think option 2 has the most going for it of the three,
> > however I'm
> > > wondering who defines "preferred" and how.
> > >
> > > Sean Hayes
> > > Incubation Lab
> > > Accessibility Business Unit
> > > Microsoft
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Office: +44 118 909 5867,
> > >
> > > Mobile: +44 7875 091385
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg
> > > Vanderheiden
> > > Sent: 29 August 2007 19:47
> > > To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'; 'TEITAC Web/Software
> > Subcommittee'
> > > Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Three Fundamental Options for
> > caption issue.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > You are right. This is ongoing in two lists.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > How about the following to pull it all together. I
> think there are
> > > fundamentally just 3 options.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > OPTION 1: - ONE "Preferred" Caption Format per media format
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1) MEDIA FORMATS that support audio must specify one
> > PREFERRED format for
> > > captioning. (though many caption techniques may exist)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2) CONTENT must use the PREFERRED format for captioning
> (though it
> > > may provide additional redundant versions of captions in
> > other formats
> > > as well.)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 3) PLAYERS must support playing of captions that are in
> PREFERRED
> > > format for any media type they play (thought they may
> support other
> > > caption formats as well)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 4) PLAYERS must allow captions to be turned on /off via a
> > mechanism
> > > that can be discovered from the player (without advanced
> > knowledge of
> > > activation
> > > sequence) OR the captions must always be rendered by the
> > player. This
> > > includes stand alone players or players embedded in content where
> > > media controls are not usually visible.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > OPTION 2: - MULTIPLE "Preferred" Caption Formats per
> media format
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Same as option 1 except.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1) MEDIA FORMATS - could have more than one PREFERRED
> > caption formats
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2) CONTENT can choose between the PREFERRED formats and
> > implement the
> > > one they like.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 3) PLAYERS - EVERY player has to support ALL
> PREFFERED formats
> > > (for the media types they play).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 4)(no change to #4)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > OPTION 3: NO "Preferred" Caption Formats per media format
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Same as option 1 except
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1) MEDIA FORMATS - could have any number of formats. No caption
> > > format is required or preferred.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2) CONTENT can use any format for captioning that they like.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 3) PLAYERS - EVERY player has to support ALL possible
> > formats for
> > > captioning for their media types.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 4)(no change to #4)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > CONCLUSION
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Option 1 is easiest for players
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Option 2 is easiest and most flexible for content providers.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Option 3 does not seem practical.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gregg
> > >
> > > -- ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > >> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > >
> > >> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> > >
> > >> Hoffman, Allen
> > >
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 11:51 AM
> > >
> > >> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
> > >
> > >> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] FW: Revised proposal for Sec.
> > >
> > >> 4.AdditionalProvisions for Audio-Visual Players or Displays
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> If it helps:
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> We have two groups talking a bit about similar topics now.
> > >
> > >> A/V and web/software, regarding both a/v content requirements
> > >
> > >> and a/v hardware/software user-agent requirements. We also
> > >
> > >> have to some extent authoring tool requirements discussion
> > >
> > >> for a/v, but in the authoring tool area this didn't come up
> > >
> > >> really with a/v specifically in mind.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> So, I think we have content-format requirements that could
> > >
> > >> include a/v requirements regarding how captions are stored,
> > >
> > >> and could include how video-description is also stored.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> I think we have specific captioning content storage format
> > >
> > >> requirements which allow for broadcast transport, e.g. 608/708.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> I think we have user-agent requirements that say things like,
> > >
> > >> provide ability to turn captions on/off if not open, ditto
> > >
> > >> for video-descriptions, and some other options. Some of this
> > >
> > >> may be scoped by type of playback platform, e.g. a DVD player
> > >
> > >> vs. a media-player running on a PC, vs. a media player taking
> > >
> > >> streaming from a web page.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> The part that's missing in web/software is user-agent part
> > >
> > >> and our user-agent requires might be defined in a/v and
> > >
> > >> scoped to fit in web/software?
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> The content storage requirements should be defined in a/v and
> > >
> > >> then migrated to content format.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> The authoring tool requirements if definable should be
> > >
> > >> defined here and inserted in authoring tool section.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> I hate to say it this way but in the end most of this gets
> > >
> > >> split up here and there--but that's because a/v is so
> > >
> > >> integrated into everything now.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> So, how can we facilitate this assemblage and distribution?
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > >> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > >
> > >> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> > >
> > >> Larry Goldberg
> > >
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 12:37 PM
> > >
> > >> To: TEITAC AV list
> > >
> > >> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] FW: Revised proposal for Sec. 4.
> > >
> > >> AdditionalProvisions for Audio-Visual Players or Displays
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> I agree that this is an authoring issue, but we do need to
> > >
> > >> know what to author to and the capabilities of the engines
> > >
> > >> we're authoring for.
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> ... Larry ...
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> Sean Hayes wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>> That's partly true. The caption data needs to be stored
> > in a master
> > >
> > >>> format somewhere that can be converted to any and all
> > >
> > >> play-out formats
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>> by the copyright owner. That does not imply that it needs to be
> > >
> > >>> converted from playback format A to playback format B by all and
> > >
> > >>> sundry. While it is technically possible for example to go
> > >
> > >> from 708 to
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>> SAMI or vice-versa, it is fairly hard, likely a lossy
> > >
> > >> conversion, and
> > >
> > >>> an N-squared problem to accommodate all the playback formats.
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> The lock in and interoperability problem today is largely
> > >
> > >> due to the
> > >
> > >>> various proprietary subtitling equipment being used and
> > >
> > >> formats at the
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>> authoring level; not with the delivery format. DFXP was
> > >
> > >> created to try
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>> and build a lingua-franca at the authoring level, however
> > >
> > >> it is early
> > >
> > >>> days for that process.
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> Re-authoring for various delivery formats is the practical
> > >
> > >> reality for
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>> a multiplicity of reasons, codec's; aspect ratio;
> resolution etc.
> > >
> > >>> Captioning should be an ingrained part of this process,
> just like
> > >
> > >>> audio is. If we want to put 508 constraints out there
> to help the
> > >
> > >>> state of captioning, the content format and authoring tools
> > >
> > >> provisions
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>> may be the place to do it. The player rules are not.
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> Sean Hayes
> > >
> > >>> Incubation Lab
> > >
> > >>> Accessibility Business Unit
> > >
> > >>> Microsoft
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> Office: +44 118 909 5867,
> > >
> > >>> Mobile: +44 7875 091385
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > >>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > >
> > >>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Larry
> > >
> > >>> Goldberg
> > >
> > >>> Sent: 29 August 2007 14:18
> > >
> > >>> To: TEITAC AV list
> > >
> > >>> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] FW: Revised proposal for Sec. 4.
> > >
> > >>> AdditionalProvisions for Audio-Visual Players or Displays
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> The caption data need to be interoperable, not the
> playback media.
> > >
> > >>> That is, we can readily convert 608 to 708 to SMIL to
> SAMI to DFXP
> > >
> > >>> caption formats. A new format developed by HD-DVD and/or
> > >
> > >> BluRay to be
> > >
> > >>> functionally equivalent to 708 needs to be readily
> > >
> > >> transferable to and
> > >
> > >> from other accepted formats.
> > >
> > >>> If this is not the case, then a government agency would be
> > >
> > >> forced to
> > >
> > >>> re-author their captions for this special new format
> (anticipating
> > >
> > >>> that media will be distributed in multiple formats for
> > training and
> > >
> > >>> public information).
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> - Larry
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>> Sean Hayes wrote:
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>>> What do you mean by interoperability here? And why is this
> > >
> > >> an issue?
> > >
> > >>>> the world is full of non interoperable systems, Flash,
> > HTML, Java,
> > >
> > >>>> SMIL, blah blah blah.
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> If an agency picked VHS then they couldn't play it back on
> > >
> > >> computers
> > >
> > >>>> or DVD players. If they picked Flash to publish a
> > >
> > >> multimedia course
> > >
> > >>>> then they couldn't use a Java player to view it.
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> If an agency wants to do electronic distribution, they
> > >
> > >> would need to
> > >
> > >>>> procure a complete system. If for example the agency
> chose to use
> > >
> > >>>> windows media for something, then they would need to
> > acquire tools
> > >
> > >>>> that can generate, caption, and stream it, and players
> > to view it.
> > >
> > >>>> There exists many tools for importing and exporting
> various media
> > >
> > >>>> formats if that is an issue.
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> I don't see any new problem here which isn't true of all E&IT.
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> Sean Hayes
> > >
> > >>>> Incubation Lab
> > >
> > >>>> Accessibility Business Unit
> > >
> > >>>> Microsoft
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> Office: +44 118 909 5867,
> > >
> > >>>> Mobile: +44 7875 091385
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > >
> > >>>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> Behalf Of Gregg
> > >
> > >>>> Vanderheiden
> > >
> > >>>> Sent: 29 August 2007 04:19
> > >
> > >>>> To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'
> > >
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] FW: Revised proposal for Sec. 4.
> > >
> > >>>> AdditionalProvisions for Audio-Visual Players or Displays
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> Thanks
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> Couple questions about the part where you changed it to
> > "Uses this
> > >
> > >>>> standard...
> > >
> > >>>> Captions or timed text (as defined by procuring agency)
> > or display
> > >
> > >>>> open caption video"
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> - How would you get interoperability if each agency
> picks its own
> > >
> > >> standards?
> > >
> > >>>> - Will purchasing agents have any idea what to specify?
> > >
> > >>>> - And how would a mfgr know how to design products if they
> > >
> > >> don't know
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>>> what standard will apply until the get the P.O.?
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> Maybe I'm missing something
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> Thanks
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>> Gregg
> > >
> > >>>> -- ------------------------------
> > >
> > >>>> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >>>>

• Next message in Thread: Larry Goldberg: "Re: Three FundamentalOptionsforcaption issue."
• Previous message in Thread: None