E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 4 (In chronological order)

From: Alan Zaitchik
Date: Wed, Jan 03 2018 1:23PM
Subject: Alternative presentation of content
No previous message | Next message →

We have a problem developing a Lectora-based presentation in which on-screen information is not the same as what is read in an audio track on the page. The transcripts for each audio do not therefore deliver equivalent information since they do not include the on-screen text. Changing either the on-screen text or the audio (and transcript) is not possible, alas.

So…

One idea we had was to write a text-only equivalent version for each slide's screen+audio; we would make this equivalent presentation available through an "accessible version" icon (control) on each page; the icon is initially hidden but a sight-impaired user will have been told to find the control by tabbing to it; the icon/control becomes active (and visible) when given focus; when clicked it causes the screen reader to read the equivalent content. For users who may not have a screen reader but who need this alternative we can display the text-only version as an overlay.

Would this be considered an alternative presentation of content?

Thanks for your input!

Alan Zaitchik
Center For Social Innovation

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Wed, Jan 03 2018 8:49PM
Subject: Re: Alternative presentation of content
← Previous message | Next message →

Alan,

It seems like there may be some confusion about the captions/transcript you are talking about. I may misunderstand your question -- but based on what I think you are saying If you have audio and text on the screen that the screen reader can access then there is no requirement to make the audio into text for a screen reader user under the current standards.

The group of users that is likely to have the issue is users who are deaf or hard of hearing including people who are deafblind who may not have access to what is spoken in the audio that is different than what is on-screen. For this group of users they will want synchronized text (if the visual and audio are synchronized) or transcript (if synchronization is not used)

If the content is slide based with next buttons without any real synchronization -- text is on-screen and there is audio then you likely can make a case to display a pop-up with the audio as text presented in a box that doesn't cover the visual content.

Again, I can't say for sure without looking at your situation -- so these are just some initial thoughts based on what you describe.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
Level Access, inc. (formerly SSB BART Group, inc.)
(703) 637-8957
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
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.

From: Alan Zaitchik
Date: Thu, Jan 04 2018 12:47PM
Subject: Re: Alternative presentation of content
← Previous message | Next message →

Thank you, Sandy and Jonathan, for your responses.

What I wrote wasn't clear enough; probably the issues were not clear enough in my own mind either!

Our client wants the text on screen to "fill in" as the audio clip plays. The on screen text will be different from what is in the audio track. Personally, I think this raises an instructional design issue of comprehension for all users, and especially those with cognitive disabilities. The client, however, seems convinced this design will hold a user's attention better than static text and an audio that plays only when clicked, which was what we proposed.

But apart from that, is there a 508 requirement to synchronize screen-reader access to the on-screen text with the audio track as it plays? How would a vision-impaired user switch from audio to screen reader recitation of on-screen text and back again to audio as new text is displayed? Nothing in the audio alerts the user to there being new text on screen. I am not sure that any aria-live magic would help here, either. So it seems we would want the vision-impaired user to listen to the audio in its entirety and then have the screen reader recite all the text that has accumulated on the screen. Is this non-synchronized experience acceptable in terms of accessibility requirements as equivalent to that of sighted users.

Hearing-impaired users would also have a non-synchronized experience since they would read the audio transcript and the on-screen text in whatever order they want with no sense that the one is synchronized with the other.

Is this OK?

If it is not we considered writing NEW text that would fold all the "pieces" of on-screen text into the relevant "pieces" of audio transcript text so that listening to this new text in a screen reader (vision-impaired users) or just reading it (hearing-impaired) would actually be equivalent to the synchronized experience of the content that hearing and vision unimpaired users have.

Is that necessary?

A related question was whether having an audio clip play automatically when the page loads, with no user click on a Play button required, is acceptable. We assumed it is not, but perhaps that is incorrect. Perhaps the navigation button that loads each page could have an aria-label like "Move to next screen and play audio" or something like that.

Alan

On 1/3/18, 10:49 PM, "Jonathan Avila" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

Alan,

It seems like there may be some confusion about the captions/transcript you are talking about. I may misunderstand your question -- but based on what I think you are saying If you have audio and text on the screen that the screen reader can access then there is no requirement to make the audio into text for a screen reader user under the current standards.

The group of users that is likely to have the issue is users who are deaf or hard of hearing including people who are deafblind who may not have access to what is spoken in the audio that is different than what is on-screen. For this group of users they will want synchronized text (if the visual and audio are synchronized) or transcript (if synchronization is not used)

If the content is slide based with next buttons without any real synchronization -- text is on-screen and there is audio then you likely can make a case to display a pop-up with the audio as text presented in a box that doesn't cover the visual content.

Again, I can't say for sure without looking at your situation -- so these are just some initial thoughts based on what you describe.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
Level Access, inc. (formerly SSB BART Group, inc.)
(703) 637-8957
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
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.

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Thu, Jan 04 2018 8:12PM
Subject: Re: Alternative presentation of content
← Previous message | No next message

Alan, I think you will need to carefully look at the term Synchronized Media

From WCAG: audio or video synchronized with another format for presenting information and/or with time-based interactive components, unless the media is a media alternative for text that is clearly labeled as such
(The understanding document for SC 1.2.3) https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/media-equiv-audio-desc.html

If the slides auto advance and the user would be expected to separately listen to one and then go back and read the other than that sounds like you have synchronized media and thus a synchronized alternative would be required. If your proposed pop-up could be treated like captions or turned into something like extended audio descriptions via aria-live regions then you could be able to make an argument that it is a synchronized alternative. At what granularity text has to be synchronized is required is not totally clear. For example, general captioning best practices would not consider displaying a large amount of text as synchronized -- but if you were able to highlight the spoken text in that transcript that highlight likely could be considered synchronized. The highlighted transcript would need to be a true transcript indicating all things required for captions such as speaker and other non-decorative sounds, etc.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
Level Access, inc. (formerly SSB BART Group, inc.)
(703) 637-8957
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
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.