E-mail List Archives
Re: Video Transcript Question (Bump)
From: Ryan E. Benson
Date: Nov 23, 2014 7:00PM
- Next message: Mallory van Achterberg: "Re: aria-expanded state for show-hide interaction?"
- Previous message: Birkir R. Gunnarsson: "Re: aria-expanded state for show-hide interaction?"
- Next message in Thread: Tim Harshbarger: "Re: Video Transcript Question (Bump)"
- Previous message in Thread: L Snider: "Re: Video Transcript Question (Bump)"
- View all messages in this Thread
I somewhat disagree with karl's approach. While headings will give it
structure, but if the answers are short, that could mean every other line
or so being a heading. This could lead them lose their value in some
people's eyes. What would you think if you opened up a 2-3 page doc with 20
headings?
Now if the interview had topic break-points or long answers (2+
paragraphs), I would recommend using headings.
I would agree with John with HTML vs PDF, unless you know that most of your
users will read the document when they don't have the internet. I haven't
done testing with Word 2013, but even though there is a way to create an
accessible PDF option in Word, there are false positives that can occur.
--
Ryan E. Benson
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 4:19 PM, L Snider < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Yes, good reminders and the link text example was a good one. The Word
> documents will be made into PDF documents, so people can download them. My
> feeling was always that if you create an accessible Word>PDF that it was
> better than an HTML page as one can download it and read it when they like
> (not having to be on the net).
>
> I would be curious to hear your view, and others, on PDF versus HTML (oh
> and for forms, HTML is the way to go, not the PDF in my view).
>
> Cheers
>
> Lisa
>
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 12:58 PM, John Foliot < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > Hi Lisa,
> >
> >
> >
> > Overall, I agree with Karl's recommendation, while at the same time
> > pointing
> > out a few things (that hopefully others might learn from too):
> >
> >
> >
> > 1) Providing a transcript is more than a "nice to have" (in case others
> > might start thinking that) - it is in fact often a requirement for WCAG
> AA
> > Compliance:
> >
> >
> >
> > 1.2.3 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded): An
> > alternative for time-based media or audio description of the prerecorded
> > video content is provided for synchronized media, except when the media
> is
> > a
> > media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such. (Level A)
> >
> >
> >
> > ...where the transcript is the 'alternative' to the audio-description.
> (The
> > audio description piece of course being a AA requirement:
> >
> > 1.2.5 Audio Description (Prerecorded): Audio description is
> provided
> > for all prerecorded video content in synchronized media. (Level AA))
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2) You mentioned having a transcript in Word. While obviously we want to
> > avoid formats that may introduce their own issues (i.e. user does not
> have
> > MS Office), there are examples of .rtf and .pdf transcripts that are
> > provided for download, which technically meet the WCAG Requirement, so
> > providing the transcript in an alternative format is not forbidden.
> >
> >
> >
> > However, as always, HTML is the preferred format for interoperability.
> > Semantically structured HTML (aka POSH - Plain Old Semantic HTML) is
> still
> > the best :) Karl's suggestion of using <h>headings is one that I would
> > also
> > recommend, although depending on the content I might also look at the
> > viability of definition lists:
> >
> > <dl>
> > <dt>Question 1</dt>
> >
> > <dd>Response to question 1</dd>
> >
> > <dt>Question 2</dt>
> >
> > <dd>Response to question 2</dd>
> >
> > <dt>Question 3</dt>
> >
> > <dd>Response to question 3</dd>
> >
> > </dl>
> >
> >
> >
> > 3) Currently HTML5 lacks a programmatic way of *directly linking* a
> > transcript to a video, which can be problematic, especially if a web page
> > contains more than one video.
> >
> >
> >
> > While this is a known issue (and it is being worked on now), I highly
> > recommend that the link text for your transcript be well labeled; i.e.
> > avoid
> > this:
> >
> > <a href="">transcript</a>
> >
> >
> >
> > .in favor of either:
> >
> >
> >
> > <a href="">Transcript for the XYZ Video</a> [explicit, clear link text]
> >
> > or
> >
> > <a href="" aria-label="Transcript for the XYZ Video ">transcript</a>
> >
> >
> >
> > .although the second solution is only viable for users with Assistive
> > Technology.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > FWIW.
> >
> >
> >
> > JF
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > John Foliot
> > Web Accessibility Specialist
> > W3C Invited Expert - Accessibility
> >
> > Co-Founder, Open Web Camp
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
- Next message: Mallory van Achterberg: "Re: aria-expanded state for show-hide interaction?"
- Previous message: Birkir R. Gunnarsson: "Re: aria-expanded state for show-hide interaction?"
- Next message in Thread: Tim Harshbarger: "Re: Video Transcript Question (Bump)"
- Previous message in Thread: L Snider: "Re: Video Transcript Question (Bump)"
- View all messages in this Thread