WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: transcription of audio

for

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Nov 5, 2018 8:57AM


> Of course the best result would be for all media to have captions, descriptive transcripts, and (if necessary) audio description - and this is precisely what we recommend.

> Consider someone that is deaf-blind or that requires a text
alternative to multimedia. They currently are provided no alternative
at all under WCAG Level AA. This is hugely impactful to these users.

Yes, so make the transcript requirement Level AA and keep audio description at Level AA as well. I've also noticed some players like YouTube providing the captions in a screen reader consumable way that screen readers could access -- so a requirement to use closed captions in a way that is programmatically available would also be good for some people who are blind and hard of hearing who may be able to get some audio but need captions to fill in the words that are not understandable. Since there are different degrees of vision and hearing loss having intermediate options that allow for flexibility for any formats is optimal -- but likely Level AAA for programmatically determinable captions.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
Level Access
<EMAIL REMOVED>
703.637.8957 office

Visit us online:
Website | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Blog

Looking to boost your accessibility knowledge? Check out our free webinars!

The information contained in this transmission may be attorney privileged and/or confidential information intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 10:50 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] transcription of audio

> I respectfully disagree that audio description should be at Level AAA.

> An alternative that is separate is not an equivalent experience.

Consider someone that is deaf-blind or that requires a text
alternative to multimedia. They currently are provided no alternative
at all under WCAG Level AA. This is hugely impactful to these users.

While most media can be produced to remove the need for audio
description if it is designed to be self-described, the reality is
that due to the cost, effort, and expertise involved, audio
description is nearly non-existent on the web for multimedia that
needs it. On the other hand, if that media is captioned (as required
at Level A), it is trivial to provide a descriptive transcript. WCAG,
however, does not require this until AAA.

I fully realize that my recommendation may come at a cost to users
with visual disabilities encountering multimedia that has visual-only
content. Would the impact on these users needing to access a
transcript be less than the current impact of WCAG AA providing no
accessibility at all for a different, extensive audience? I don't
really know, but I think it's a good question for the W3C to consider.

Of course the best result would be for all media to have captions,
descriptive transcripts, and (if necessary) audio description - and
this is precisely what we recommend.

Jared