Thread Subject: Re: Final proposed language on user controls

From: Karen Peltz Strauss
Date: Tue, Nov 06 2007 7:00 AM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: Larry Goldberg: "Re: Final proposed language on user controls"
• Previous message in thread: Greg Fields: "Re: Final proposed language on user controls"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

We are still permitted to add it to the sandbox as a placeholder - it can go
in as my proposed version if the subcommittee has not yet agreed to it.
This is how the 255 additions went in, along with various other
contributions from others.

Karen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Fields" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Final proposed language on user controls


> Perhaps we should not send the second part forward until we have agreement
> in principle amongst the subcom members.
> -----------------------
> Sent via BlackBerry Curve
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Sent: Tue Nov 06 07:17:38 2007
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Final proposed language on user controls
>
> As a group I think we have agreed on the first part (for 4-A.1). I don't
> agree that we have consensus on the second part (for 4-A.2), we did not
> discuss that on the conference call, and I, and I think others, still have
> issues with it.
>
> So in sending forward to the EWG, can you clearly delineate the status of
> these two sections.
>
> Thanks,
>
> 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 Karen Peltz
> Strauss
> Sent: 06 November 2007 11:34
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Final proposed language on user controls
>
> Larry
>
> I just checked the Wiki and learned that a version of the language on
> captioning controls that we had agreed upon several weeks ago, but have
> since changed, is posted there. This is because the newer language (from
> the last conference call and a subsequent addition by Paul) was prepared
> after the initial draft was closed for revision. All new drafts are being
> put into the "sandbox" and must be submitted by this Friday so they can be
> distributed to the group. These need to be sent to Whitney and Michele
> of
> the EWG.
>
> I believe that this is the current language that the group has generally
> agreed to for now. If this is the case, can you send this along?:
>
> "For products that are covered under 4-A.1, the user controls needed to
> access closed captioning and video description must be in at least one
> location that is comparable in prominence to the controls needed to
> control
> volume or program selection. At a minimum, this requires placement of such
> controls on either the product's physical apparatus or its remote control,
> where the ability to control volume or program selection is otherwise
> provided on that apparatus or remote control.
>
> For example:
> For captioning:
>
> a. A caption on/off button on a TV remote comparable in prominence to the
> volume control on that remote;
> b Caption controls on the first menu that appear when on-screen menus are
> displayed
>
> For video description: A tactile button to turn on video description.
>
> Note: Comparable in prominence does not require exact equivalence in
> size,
> location, or shape.
>
> Rationale: Manufacturers are encouraged to use buttons with unique shapes
> to enable persons with low vision to make a tactile distinction among
> them.
>
> For products that are covered under 4-A.2, the user controls needed to
> access closed captioning and video description must be comparable in
> prominence to the play controls or channel selector."
>
> Karen
>

• Next message in Thread: Larry Goldberg: "Re: Final proposed language on user controls"
• Previous message in Thread: Greg Fields: "Re: Final proposed language on user controls"