WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Reality Check (was RE: accessibility for deaf)

for

From: Joe Clark
Date: May 3, 2006 12:10PM

>From: "Sandra Andrews" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>
>As for clear and simple writing: we are thinking about podcast
>accessibility over here. Should we be presenting, along with the
>podcast, an expanded outline, rather than just a word for word
>transcription? The word for word transcription is hardly clear and
>simple.

If you're doing actual transcription of podcasts, you'll pretty much
be the first. And no, you shouldn't be summarizing per se. While
utterances are not copyrightable, recorded utterances are
copyrightable and indeed are copyrighted upon creation. Who owns the
copyright can be a complex issue, but it is not automatic that
permission to transcribe is also permission to rewrite and condense.
(Check the concept of moral rights or droit moral and also the
concept of derivative works.)

HTML has poor semantics for transcription, another of the many facts
that doom podcasting from an accessibility perspective, but if you
are least using headings here and there it would help.

--

Joe Clark | <EMAIL REMOVED>
Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>;
Expect criticism if you top-post