Thread Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Return to this mailing list's archives

From: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Wed, Aug 01 2007 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

I might have missed this, and discussion, but I don't feel comfortable
allow text transcripts as video description under #2.

6.2-C - Video Description

All materials containing video and/or audio, regardless of format, that
contain visual information necessary for the comprehension of the
content, must
comply with the following:

list of 3 items
1. materials containing prerecorded video and no original audio or other
additional time-based content must provide either a separate text
description of
the video or provide an additional audio track to convey the
informational content of the video.
2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent audio must
provide synchronized audio descriptions, or a separate text description
of the video,
to convey the informational content of the video.
3. materials containing live video must provide synchronized audio
descriptions in real time to convey the informational content of the
video.
list end




Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303

From: Larry Goldberg
Date: Thu, Aug 02 2007 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

I agree and propose deleting the phrase, "or a separate text description of
the video," from #2, leaving:

2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent audio must
provide synchronized audio descriptions to convey the informational content
of the video.

- Larry


Hoffman, Allen wrote:

> I might have missed this, and discussion, but I don't feel comfortable
> allow text transcripts as video description under #2.
>
> 6.2-C - Video Description
>
> All materials containing video and/or audio, regardless of format, that
> contain visual information necessary for the comprehension of the
> content, must
> comply with the following:
>
> list of 3 items
> 1. materials containing prerecorded video and no original audio or other
> additional time-based content must provide either a separate text
> description of
> the video or provide an additional audio track to convey the
> informational content of the video.
> 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent audio must
> provide synchronized audio descriptions, or a separate text description
> of the video,
> to convey the informational content of the video.
> 3. materials containing live video must provide synchronized audio
> descriptions in real time to convey the informational content of the
> video.
> list end
>
>
>
>
> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>
>
>
>
>
>

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Thu, Aug 02 2007 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

I can understand why, but I think that part of the discussion started
around the question that if we lower the bar for audio description we
might have a better final result, even if the method is not as good.
This was based on the observation that there is very little audio
description of video on federal sites.

AWK

> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Larry Goldberg
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM
> To: TEITAC AV list
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions
>
> I agree and propose deleting the phrase, "or a separate text
> description of the video," from #2, leaving:
>
> 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent
> audio must provide synchronized audio descriptions to convey
> the informational content of the video.
>
> - Larry
>
>
> Hoffman, Allen wrote:
>
> > I might have missed this, and discussion, but I don't feel
> comfortable
> > allow text transcripts as video description under #2.
> >
> > 6.2-C - Video Description
> >
> > All materials containing video and/or audio, regardless of format,
> > that contain visual information necessary for the
> comprehension of the
> > content, must comply with the following:
> >
> > list of 3 items
> > 1. materials containing prerecorded video and no original audio or
> > other additional time-based content must provide either a separate
> > text description of the video or provide an additional
> audio track to
> > convey the informational content of the video.
> > 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent
> audio must
> > provide synchronized audio descriptions, or a separate text
> > description of the video, to convey the informational
> content of the
> > video.
> > 3. materials containing live video must provide synchronized audio
> > descriptions in real time to convey the informational
> content of the
> > video.
> > list end
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

From: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Thu, Aug 02 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Federally produced items that would need audio description are not that
rare. What is rare is finding those that meet the requirement.

Even simple things like sexual harassment courses often have nonverbal
scenes that would require such description.
there are, however, lots of "talking head" courses and online
presentations that don't need it, but I don't feel this requirement can
be dropped.

As someone who is totally blind, reading a text-transcript and then
accessing the "video" makes me review it twice. Audio description
allows single use for me. I, for one, have real difficulty reading
Braille, or listening to the text-to-speech of a transcript wile also
listening to the audio of a a/v product simultaneously.





Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andrew
Kirkpatrick
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 3:03 PM
To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions

I can understand why, but I think that part of the discussion started
around the question that if we lower the bar for audio description we
might have a better final result, even if the method is not as good.
This was based on the observation that there is very little audio
description of video on federal sites.

AWK

> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Larry
> Goldberg
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM
> To: TEITAC AV list
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions
>
> I agree and propose deleting the phrase, "or a separate text
> description of the video," from #2, leaving:
>
> 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent audio must
> provide synchronized audio descriptions to convey the informational
> content of the video.
>
> - Larry
>
>
> Hoffman, Allen wrote:
>
> > I might have missed this, and discussion, but I don't feel
> comfortable
> > allow text transcripts as video description under #2.
> >
> > 6.2-C - Video Description
> >
> > All materials containing video and/or audio, regardless of format,
> > that contain visual information necessary for the
> comprehension of the
> > content, must comply with the following:
> >
> > list of 3 items
> > 1. materials containing prerecorded video and no original audio or
> > other additional time-based content must provide either a separate
> > text description of the video or provide an additional
> audio track to
> > convey the informational content of the video.
> > 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent
> audio must
> > provide synchronized audio descriptions, or a separate text
> > description of the video, to convey the informational
> content of the
> > video.
> > 3. materials containing live video must provide synchronized audio
> > descriptions in real time to convey the informational
> content of the
> > video.
> > list end
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

From: Larry Goldberg
Date: Thu, Aug 02 2007 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Yes, that was the discussion - but we never really talked it out thoroughly,
so I was surprised to see the alternative enshrined in the final draft.

- Larry


Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:

> I can understand why, but I think that part of the discussion started
> around the question that if we lower the bar for audio description we
> might have a better final result, even if the method is not as good.
> This was based on the observation that there is very little audio
> description of video on federal sites.
>
> AWK
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
>> Larry Goldberg
>> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM
>> To: TEITAC AV list
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions
>>
>> I agree and propose deleting the phrase, "or a separate text
>> description of the video," from #2, leaving:
>>
>> 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent
>> audio must provide synchronized audio descriptions to convey
>> the informational content of the video.
>>
>> - Larry
>>
>>
>> Hoffman, Allen wrote:
>>
>>> I might have missed this, and discussion, but I don't feel
>> comfortable
>>> allow text transcripts as video description under #2.
>>>
>>> 6.2-C - Video Description
>>>
>>> All materials containing video and/or audio, regardless of format,
>>> that contain visual information necessary for the
>> comprehension of the
>>> content, must comply with the following:
>>>
>>> list of 3 items
>>> 1. materials containing prerecorded video and no original audio or
>>> other additional time-based content must provide either a separate
>>> text description of the video or provide an additional
>> audio track to
>>> convey the informational content of the video.
>>> 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent
>> audio must
>>> provide synchronized audio descriptions, or a separate text
>>> description of the video, to convey the informational
>> content of the
>>> video.
>>> 3. materials containing live video must provide synchronized audio
>>> descriptions in real time to convey the informational
>> content of the
>>> video.
>>> list end
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

From: Jared Smith
Date: Thu, Aug 02 2007 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

On 8/2/07, Hoffman, Allen < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Federally produced items that would need audio description are not that
> rare. What is rare is finding those that meet the requirement.

Indeed. This is all a matter of whether the burden on the developer
should be a factor in determining which guidelines we propose. This
has never really been clear to me from the beginning.

> I, for one, have real difficulty reading
> Braille, or listening to the text-to-speech of a transcript wile also
> listening to the audio of a a/v product simultaneously.

But for many, including those who are deaf-blind and many with
cognitive disabilities, the text description (not to be confused with
a transcript, though this argument stands for those as well) is the
only mechanism for accessing the content.

Why not audio description *AND* text description? And similarly, why
not captions *AND* transcripts?

Jared Smith

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Thu, Aug 02 2007 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

The phrase that is in WCAG was "or a full text alternative for multimedia
including any interaction". This is not a transcript. This would be like a
screenplay or book. Its definition is:




full text alternative for multimedia including any interaction


document including correctly sequenced text descriptions of all visual
settings, actions, speakers, and non-speech sounds, and transcript of all
dialogue combined with a means of achieving any outcomes that are achieved
using interaction (if any) during the multimedia

Note: A screenplay used to create the multimedia content would meet this
definition only if it was corrected to accurately represent the final
multimedia after editing.



Rationale:

This was included as an alternative to the audio description because
sometime there is BOTH non-stop talking and additional visual information
that is critical to understanding the multimedia. Some people also think
this is less work than video descriptions - but that is not the primary
motivator. By the way - the "full text alternative for multimedia including
any interaction" does provide access by people who are deaf-blind.









Gregg

-- ------------------------------

Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.







> -----Original Message-----

> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of

> Larry Goldberg

> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:47 PM

> To: TEITAC AV list

> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions

>

> I agree and propose deleting the phrase, "or a separate text

> description of the video," from #2, leaving:

>

> 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent

> audio must provide synchronized audio descriptions to convey

> the informational content of the video.

>

> - Larry

>

>

> Hoffman, Allen wrote:

>

> > I might have missed this, and discussion, but I don't feel

> comfortable

> > allow text transcripts as video description under #2.

> >

> > 6.2-C - Video Description

> >

> > All materials containing video and/or audio, regardless of format,

> > that contain visual information necessary for the

> comprehension of the

> > content, must comply with the following:

> >

> > list of 3 items

> > 1. materials containing prerecorded video and no original audio or

> > other additional time-based content must provide either a separate

> > text description of the video or provide an additional

> audio track to

> > convey the informational content of the video.

> > 2. materials containing prerecorded video with concurrent

> audio must

> > provide synchronized audio descriptions, or a separate text

> > description of the video, to convey the informational

> content of the

> > video.

> > 3. materials containing live video must provide synchronized audio

> > descriptions in real time to convey the informational

> content of the

> > video.

> > list end

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

From: Jim Tobias
Date: Fri, Aug 03 2007 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Allen Hoffman wrote:
> As someone who is totally blind, reading a text-transcript
> and then accessing the "video" makes me review it twice.
> Audio description allows single use for me. I, for one, have
> real difficulty reading Braille, or listening to the
> text-to-speech of a transcript wile also listening to the
> audio of a a/v product simultaneously.

Allen -- you raise an interesting point. If a transcript -- actually
a complete and true script of the video, with all speakers identified --
also included the kind of information used in audio description, would
that be an optimal solution? It would allow better hunting and
skipping. I'm just asking.

******
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
+1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
skype jimtobias
+1 908.907.2387 mobile

From: Debbie Cook
Date: Fri, Aug 03 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

I really agree with Alan on this. Reading and listening are two discrete
activities. I rarely think text transcripts as a replacement for description
have any value. First of all, fairly rew people read Braille at a level to
keep up with the audio. I do, but it's really like having two events.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Tobias" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions


Allen Hoffman wrote:
> As someone who is totally blind, reading a text-transcript
> and then accessing the "video" makes me review it twice.
> Audio description allows single use for me. I, for one, have
> real difficulty reading Braille, or listening to the
> text-to-speech of a transcript wile also listening to the
> audio of a a/v product simultaneously.

Allen -- you raise an interesting point. If a transcript -- actually
a complete and true script of the video, with all speakers identified --
also included the kind of information used in audio description, would
that be an optimal solution? It would allow better hunting and
skipping. I'm just asking.

******
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
+1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
skype jimtobias
+1 908.907.2387 mobile

From: Tom Brett
Date: Fri, Aug 03 2007 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Even though I am not blind I have experienced a similar problem when
participating in the Subcommittee meetings....

In order for me to fully participate I must follow the captions so whenever
the moderator says go look at the WIKI for this or that I am lost I can't
be two places at once.

Tom Brett


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Debbie Cook
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 10:41 AM
To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions

I really agree with Alan on this. Reading and listening are two discrete
activities. I rarely think text transcripts as a replacement for description

have any value. First of all, fairly rew people read Braille at a level to
keep up with the audio. I do, but it's really like having two events.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Tobias" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions


Allen Hoffman wrote:
> As someone who is totally blind, reading a text-transcript
> and then accessing the "video" makes me review it twice.
> Audio description allows single use for me. I, for one, have
> real difficulty reading Braille, or listening to the
> text-to-speech of a transcript wile also listening to the
> audio of a a/v product simultaneously.

Allen -- you raise an interesting point. If a transcript -- actually
a complete and true script of the video, with all speakers identified --
also included the kind of information used in audio description, would
that be an optimal solution? It would allow better hunting and
skipping. I'm just asking.

******
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
+1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
skype jimtobias
+1 908.907.2387 mobile

From: Jim Tobias
Date: Fri, Aug 03 2007 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Tom wrote:

> Even though I am not blind I have experienced a similar
> problem when participating in the Subcommittee meetings....
>
> In order for me to fully participate I must follow the
> captions so whenever the moderator says go look at the WIKI
> for this or that I am lost I can't be two places at once.

I think for a live event or event that is otherwise time-driven outside of
the user's control, all bets are off.

But what about a video that a person is viewing under their own control?
What I'm trying to get at is: if there were a single document that included
both the complete script PLUS all the text that would go into an audio
description, would that be an acceptable solution? In fact it would look
like the script of a play, with stage directions like "Arnold goes over to
the cabinet and takes out the glass globe".

From: Tom Brett
Date: Fri, Aug 03 2007 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

The user would still need to go to 2 different places to find the
information. Without seeing it (hearing it) in the media I will need to
stop, look at the transcript, rewind and then go to the next section.

Tom Brett


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim Tobias
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 11:12 AM
To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions

Tom wrote:

> Even though I am not blind I have experienced a similar
> problem when participating in the Subcommittee meetings....
>
> In order for me to fully participate I must follow the
> captions so whenever the moderator says go look at the WIKI
> for this or that I am lost I can't be two places at once.

I think for a live event or event that is otherwise time-driven outside of
the user's control, all bets are off.

But what about a video that a person is viewing under their own control?
What I'm trying to get at is: if there were a single document that included
both the complete script PLUS all the text that would go into an audio
description, would that be an acceptable solution? In fact it would look
like the script of a play, with stage directions like "Arnold goes over to
the cabinet and takes out the glass globe".

From: Debbie Cook
Date: Fri, Aug 03 2007 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

If we thought there was value in that, I would say that for blind users less
would be better. Instead of a transcrip I would want very carefully crafted
notes which told me when I should read them and told me exactly what I
needed to know at that time. That's alot of work and an art form. I doubt it
would ever happen well. I just generally don't htink transcripts work
whether it's a live event or a video. Too much stopping and starting and
trying to find your place in both media.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Brett" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions


The user would still need to go to 2 different places to find the
information. Without seeing it (hearing it) in the media I will need to
stop, look at the transcript, rewind and then go to the next section.

Tom Brett


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim Tobias
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 11:12 AM
To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions

Tom wrote:

> Even though I am not blind I have experienced a similar
> problem when participating in the Subcommittee meetings....
>
> In order for me to fully participate I must follow the
> captions so whenever the moderator says go look at the WIKI
> for this or that I am lost I can't be two places at once.

I think for a live event or event that is otherwise time-driven outside of
the user's control, all bets are off.

But what about a video that a person is viewing under their own control?
What I'm trying to get at is: if there were a single document that included
both the complete script PLUS all the text that would go into an audio
description, would that be an acceptable solution? In fact it would look
like the script of a play, with stage directions like "Arnold goes over to
the cabinet and takes out the glass globe".

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Fri, Aug 03 2007 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Thank you Jim,

This whole idea of having text be a substitute for audio-description came
from a reference to the WCAG work. What WCAG talks about is exactly what
Jim is describing below. That is, a full description of all visual and
auditory information. So looking back and forth (or listening back and
forth) would not be necessary.

Anything short of this - (e.g. only a transcript) would produce all of the
problems cited by various people.

Here again is the wording from WCAG


full text alternative for multimedia including any interaction

document including correctly sequenced text descriptions of all visual
settings, actions, speakers, and non-speech sounds, and transcript of all
dialogue combined with a means of achieving any outcomes that are achieved
using interaction (if any) during the multimedia







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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim Tobias
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 10:12 AM
> To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions
>
> Tom wrote:
>
> > Even though I am not blind I have experienced a similar
> problem when
> > participating in the Subcommittee meetings....
> >
> > In order for me to fully participate I must follow the captions so
> > whenever the moderator says go look at the WIKI for this or
> that I am
> > lost I can't be two places at once.
>
> I think for a live event or event that is otherwise
> time-driven outside of the user's control, all bets are off.
>
> But what about a video that a person is viewing under their
> own control?
> What I'm trying to get at is: if there were a single document
> that included both the complete script PLUS all the text that
> would go into an audio description, would that be an
> acceptable solution? In fact it would look like the script
> of a play, with stage directions like "Arnold goes over to
> the cabinet and takes out the glass globe".
>
>

From: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Sat, Aug 04 2007 9:50 AM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

I've been thinking through my logical analysis of the text-equivalent
for audio-description, and my feelings on it simultaneously, and trying
to recognize my own personal biases, and also understand the logical
separation of my feelings and the logic that text "screen play" should
be sufficient.

I don't feel text-equivalent is equivalent for someone who is totally
blind but can hear. If screen-plays were so great nobody would attend
the theater. Next, reading a screen play takes significantly more time
normally, and just isn't the same kind of experience, while it may
relate the information.

I will say that the screen play, as a real necessary precursor for any
well done a/v product with audio-description, should be available over
and above any audio-description provided since someone who is both deaf
and blind can use this as "the only" means of access.

I think allowing text-equivalents in lieu of synchronized, or
integrated, audio-description is taking a step backwards for something
that is technically feasible, but rarely implemented. I think we should
consider adding the supplement of text "screen play" in addition as for
anyone who is doing a solid production job will have it anyway, and we
would be increasing accessibility rather than only broadening it while
simultaneously decreasing it for some.

Let me walk through the process for developing an a/v product that
includes the captioning and descriptions to illustrate my suggestion:

1. Develop script and associated actions, assess if audio-description
can be included to improve script.
2. Develop initial captioning identifying verbal and other sounds to
describe.
3. Develop audio-description if needed.
4. Integrate audio-description in to timing of sequences, or develop
alternatives.
5. Bring all together, adjust captions and audio-descriptions
(including to script), to match final product.

Now, audio-description is done, "screen play" is done including
captioning and audio-description, and all is well.

Most often people put the audio description and captioning in at the
end, which is a lot more difficult. For publication of pre-recorded
live events this is unavoidable, but for planned products its just poor
production.








Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim Tobias
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 10:36 AM
To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions

Allen Hoffman wrote:
> As someone who is totally blind, reading a text-transcript and then
> accessing the "video" makes me review it twice.
> Audio description allows single use for me. I, for one, have real
> difficulty reading Braille, or listening to the text-to-speech of a
> transcript wile also listening to the audio of a a/v product
> simultaneously.

Allen -- you raise an interesting point. If a transcript -- actually a
complete and true script of the video, with all speakers identified --
also included the kind of information used in audio description, would
that be an optimal solution? It would allow better hunting and
skipping. I'm just asking.

******
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
+1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
skype jimtobias
+1 908.907.2387 mobile

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Sun, Aug 05 2007 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions

Hi Allen,

In the comments made to WCAG - the request was for Full Text Alternative
for two reasons.

1- Audio + Video Descriptions were not enough in many cases where there was
talking most of the time - so there was no room for audio description of the
critical visual information.

2 - because mixing audio tracks was beyond most people.

Key to the discussion here would be #1. If there is critical visual
information and no place to put it into the audio track - then Video
description won't work. There won't be enough gaps to convey the important
video information.

And for that case - adding the audio descriptions (in text form) to the
captions would still not capture the important video information.

So in WCAG the group decided that if you weren't going to provide video
descriptions then you needed to provide something that was more complete
than just captions plus a text transcript of the video descriptions. Hence
the 'Full text equivalent to multimedia - including any interaction'.



508 can decide differently, but that was the rationale for WCAG.



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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Hoffman, Allen
> Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 10:43 AM
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions
>
> I've been thinking through my logical analysis of the
> text-equivalent for audio-description, and my feelings on it
> simultaneously, and trying to recognize my own personal
> biases, and also understand the logical separation of my
> feelings and the logic that text "screen play" should be sufficient.
>
> I don't feel text-equivalent is equivalent for someone who
> is totally blind but can hear. If screen-plays were so great
> nobody would attend the theater. Next, reading a screen play
> takes significantly more time normally, and just isn't the
> same kind of experience, while it may relate the information.
>
> I will say that the screen play, as a real necessary
> precursor for any well done a/v product with
> audio-description, should be available over and above any
> audio-description provided since someone who is both deaf and
> blind can use this as "the only" means of access.
>
> I think allowing text-equivalents in lieu of synchronized, or
> integrated, audio-description is taking a step backwards for
> something that is technically feasible, but rarely
> implemented. I think we should consider adding the
> supplement of text "screen play" in addition as for anyone
> who is doing a solid production job will have it anyway, and
> we would be increasing accessibility rather than only
> broadening it while simultaneously decreasing it for some.
>
> Let me walk through the process for developing an a/v product
> that includes the captioning and descriptions to illustrate
> my suggestion:
>
> 1. Develop script and associated actions, assess if
> audio-description can be included to improve script.
> 2. Develop initial captioning identifying verbal and other
> sounds to describe.
> 3. Develop audio-description if needed.
> 4. Integrate audio-description in to timing of sequences, or
> develop alternatives.
> 5. Bring all together, adjust captions and
> audio-descriptions (including to script), to match final product.
>
> Now, audio-description is done, "screen play" is done
> including captioning and audio-description, and all is well.
>
> Most often people put the audio description and captioning in
> at the end, which is a lot more difficult. For publication
> of pre-recorded live events this is unavoidable, but for
> planned products its just poor production.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim Tobias
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 10:36 AM
> To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions
>
> Allen Hoffman wrote:
> > As someone who is totally blind, reading a text-transcript and then
> > accessing the "video" makes me review it twice.
> > Audio description allows single use for me. I, for one, have real
> > difficulty reading Braille, or listening to the text-to-speech of a
> > transcript wile also listening to the audio of a a/v product
> > simultaneously.
>
> Allen -- you raise an interesting point. If a transcript --
> actually a complete and true script of the video, with all
> speakers identified -- also included the kind of information
> used in audio description, would that be an optimal solution?
> It would allow better hunting and skipping. I'm just asking.
>
> ******
> Jim Tobias
> Inclusive Technologies
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> +1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
> skype jimtobias
> +1 908.907.2387 mobile
>
>