E-mail List Archives
Thread: First attempt using SMIL
Number of posts in this thread: 4 (In chronological order)
From: Daniel Champion
Date: Thu, Jul 13 2006 5:00AM
Subject: First attempt using SMIL
No previous message | Next message →
Hi All
I'm dipping my toe in the (for me) uncharted waters of accessible
multimedia, and would appreciate some feedback and advice.
We have a 10 minute promotional DVD which I've converted to QuickTime, and
extracted the sound from in mp3 format. Captions have been produced, and
the whole thing put together in a SMIL document.
It's available here for testing purposes before I publish it to our
unsuspecting public: http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/smil.php
It works fine for me under Firefox and IE6 under Windows 2000, but I'd
appreciate some feedback from those experienced with SMIL and presenting
video and captioning accessibly, and users of other platforms/browsers.
The particular questions I have are (and apologies if any of these are
inappropriate for this group):
1. What is the best presentational format for captioning, and can users
override the decisions I've made? I've set white text on a black
background, used Arial, and centered the captions.
2. Is there an optimum length for a caption? In places my captions span 4
lines, is this too many?
3. The files used for the SMIL document total over 32 megabytes - I've set
autoplay to true, but does this mean the video will start as soon as the
download starts, or will users need to wait for the entire files to be
downloaded?
Any advice or comments gratefully accepted.
Dan
--
Daniel Champion - Web Dev Mgr - Clackmannanshire Council
e: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = t: 01259 452258
f: 01259 452265 w: http://www.clacksweb.org.uk
This email and any attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Clackmannanshire Council.
Clackmannanshire Council will not be liable for any losses as a result of viruses being passed on.
www.clacksweb.org.uk
From: John Foliot
Date: Thu, Jul 13 2006 12:50PM
Subject: RE: First attempt using SMIL
← Previous message | Next message →
Daniel Champion wrote:
> Hi All
>
> I'm dipping my toe in the (for me) uncharted waters of accessible
> multimedia, and would appreciate some feedback and advice.
Whoa boy... Welcome to the fun stuff!
>
> We have a 10 minute promotional DVD which I've converted to
> QuickTime, and extracted the sound from in MP3 format. Captions have
> been produced, and the whole thing put together in a SMIL document.
Errr... QuickTime SMIL (as opposed to say, RealMedia SMIL, or Flash SMIL or
SAMI...)
And here-in lies the biggest problem for those of us in the trenches...
While SMIL as a specification is fairly straight-forward (Media file +
text/caption file = SMIL file), each of the media players that actually
support captioning do it differently. While Dan did not mention the steps
on how he actually arrived at his captioned QT-SMIL file, the process to
make a RealMedia-SMIL is sadly different, as is the process for the Flash
flavor (and then there is SAMI - Microsoft's own take on captioned media).
The largest issue facing the deployment of SMIL files however is not the
production aspect (which is not non-trivial) but more so the media-player
wars/plug-in requirements.
Here's the problem (and for the sake of brevity we will speak of Windows
platform only here): There is more than one media player out there, and
each of these players are competing for eyeballs. As a result, when users
are installing a third party player, they are often prompted to make the
"new" player the default player for non-native file formats; thus even if
you produce a file in the RM format, or QT, there is no guarantee that the
file will actually playback in that native player - and because Real and
QuickTime do SMIL differently... Well, they just won't work. And when you
start introducing other media players (I actually like WinAmp myself) that
attempt to be the default player... (you can see where this is going).
Remember, we have zero control over how the end user has configured their
machines/user agents.
Then there is the question of installed players: Dan, while it is a good
bet that many if not most people have the QT plug-in installed, it is not a
100% certainty, especially when you start moving into alternative user
agents. Ditto for any of the other media players. So now there is another
barrier in place that will need to be addressed to "do the right thing" -
Dan if you plan on standardizing on the QT format, ensure that a link to
download the player is readily available from the web page that contains the
SMIL file, and be specific and clear about it... Don't assume the user-agent
will assist the user in this task (this is also a cognitive issue).
>From past experience with this conundrum, I actually have reached the
conclusion that producing the Flash flavour of caption (which uses the SMIL
technology, but again it's own native output file) is actually the most
practical - unlike other media players that will play multiple media file
outputs (rm, qt, MP3, etc.) Flash is Flash is Flash. Also, the final output
is kinda slick, it allows the user to show or hide the captioning and
according to macromedia, the flash plug-in has about a 98% adoption rate
(stats and sources provided here:
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=561724)
One final note: as I recall, with the exception of Realmedia's method,
which maintains separate media and text files on the server, the other 2
outputs (QT and Flash) "mush" the text and media together for a final output
that is captioned. Because of this, I would recommend that a link to the
text only transcript used to produce the captioning also be made available
from the page that features the captioned media.
Dan, good luck on the captioning front.
JF
--
John Foliot
Academic Technology Specialist - Online Accessibility
Stanford University
560 Escondido Mall
Meyer Library 181
Stanford, CA 94305-3093
(for long time list members, yes, it's true - and I am truly excited about
my new gig. Contact me off list if you want more details)
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Mon, Jul 24 2006 2:40AM
Subject: Re: First attempt using SMIL
← Previous message | Next message →
John Foliot wrote:
> One final note: as I recall, with the exception of Realmedia's method,
> which maintains separate media and text files on the server, the other 2
> outputs (QT and Flash) "mush" the text and media together for a final output
> that is captioned.
Nope, with QT you can keep the text (in the rather "interesting" QText
format) separate, and have your SMIL reference the movie file and the
text. See for instance http://www.splintered.co.uk/experiments/66/
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
___________
re
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Mon, Jul 24 2006 10:00AM
Subject: RE: First attempt using SMIL
← Previous message | No next message
You can do it either way with Flash. You can add captions by adding
text directly to the stage or parse a separate XML file. Hi-Caption
makes this fairly easy, but you can script a solution yourself if you
know how.
AWK
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Patrick H. Lauke
> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 4:33 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] First attempt using SMIL
>
> John Foliot wrote:
>
> > One final note: as I recall, with the exception of Realmedia's
> > method, which maintains separate media and text files on
> the server,
> > the other 2 outputs (QT and Flash) "mush" the text and
> media together
> > for a final output that is captioned.
>
> Nope, with QT you can keep the text (in the rather "interesting" QText
> format) separate, and have your SMIL reference the movie file
> and the text. See for instance
> http://www.splintered.co.uk/experiments/66/
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
> ___________
> re*dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
> [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
> www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
> http://redux.deviantart.com
> ___________
> Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
> http://webstandards.org/
> ___________
>
>
>
>