E-mail List Archives
Thread: CVAA and video captioning
Number of posts in this thread: 12 (In chronological order)
From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Tue, Nov 19 2013 11:03PM
Subject: CVAA and video captioning
No previous message | Next message →
This brief about online video captioning requirements provides a succinct
overview of the accessibility requirements for video content on the web as
well as devices.
(warning: this PDF from 3 Play Media is not fully accessible, but at least
the tag tree has headings and structure)
http://info.3playmedia.com/rs/3playmedia/images/CVAA-Brief.pdf
I'm wondering how accurate the briefing paper is because one of its
statistical claims caught my interest.
In the brief, they state "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their
daily viewing time watching online video" and the footnote cites Forester
research that pitches their findings that Americans are "cutting the cord"
from traditional and cable TV, and switching to other sources, such as
Netflix and online material.
My background in statistics and data analysis sent up a red flag when I read
that statement: 30% of daily viewing time is quite a bit of time! Yes, there
are some demographics that would spend 30%, but 30% across all demographics?
I guess I could pay $499 to purchase the Forrester report and hopefully see
their data, but that's a bit out of my budget.
Can any listmembers with knowledge about US captioning regulations comment
on the brief? Aside from the "30%" claim, I'm wondering if the brief is
accurate enough to give communication managers who need a brief summary
about US accessibility requirements and online video.
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
From: Andrews, David B (DEED)
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 8:37AM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
It is indeed ironic that a PDF about accessibility is itself mostly inaccessible! For JAWS users, the PDF is all but useless. It contains text, but the words are all run together, which some desktop publishing programs seem to do when they spit out PDF's. You technical experts will know better than I why this is, but comprehension would involve reviewing word by word to sort it out!
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Chagnon | PubCom
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 12:03 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
This brief about online video captioning requirements provides a succinct overview of the accessibility requirements for video content on the web as well as devices.
(warning: this PDF from 3 Play Media is not fully accessible, but at least the tag tree has headings and structure) http://info.3playmedia.com/rs/3playmedia/images/CVAA-Brief.pdf
I'm wondering how accurate the briefing paper is because one of its statistical claims caught my interest.
In the brief, they state "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their daily viewing time watching online video" and the footnote cites Forester research that pitches their findings that Americans are "cutting the cord"
from traditional and cable TV, and switching to other sources, such as Netflix and online material.
My background in statistics and data analysis sent up a red flag when I read that statement: 30% of daily viewing time is quite a bit of time! Yes, there are some demographics that would spend 30%, but 30% across all demographics?
I guess I could pay $499 to purchase the Forrester report and hopefully see their data, but that's a bit out of my budget.
Can any listmembers with knowledge about US captioning regulations comment on the brief? Aside from the "30%" claim, I'm wondering if the brief is accurate enough to give communication managers who need a brief summary about US accessibility requirements and online video.
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508 Accessibility.
From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 9:23AM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
Checking the PDF's metadata, it appears that the accessibility problems were
caused by
1) an older version of Word was used to create the source document.
2) an older version of Acrobat PDF Maker (version 10) was used to convert
the Word file to PDF.
3) an under-trained person made the document.
In other words, outdated software and user errors.
At first glance, yes I agree that it's ironic that their PDF isn't
accessible.
But then again, they're experts at video accessibility, not document or
website accessibility. Although there are many facets of accessibility that
span across those 3 types of communication, it's difficult to be an expert
in all of them.
So although they may know the ins and outs of making an accessible video for
You Tube, that doesn't guarantee they know anything about how to write,
design, structure and format a Word document so that it creates an
accessible PDF.
-Bevi Chagnon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
New Sec. 508 Workshop & EPUBs Tour in 2013 - www.Workshop.Pubcom.com
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andrews, David B
(DEED)
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:38 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
It is indeed ironic that a PDF about accessibility is itself mostly
inaccessible! For JAWS users, the PDF is all but useless. It contains
text, but the words are all run together, which some desktop publishing
programs seem to do when they spit out PDF's. You technical experts will
know better than I why this is, but comprehension would involve reviewing
word by word to sort it out!
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Chagnon | PubCom
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 12:03 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
This brief about online video captioning requirements provides a succinct
overview of the accessibility requirements for video content on the web as
well as devices.
(warning: this PDF from 3 Play Media is not fully accessible, but at least
the tag tree has headings and structure)
http://info.3playmedia.com/rs/3playmedia/images/CVAA-Brief.pdf
I'm wondering how accurate the briefing paper is because one of its
statistical claims caught my interest.
In the brief, they state "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their
daily viewing time watching online video" and the footnote cites Forester
research that pitches their findings that Americans are "cutting the cord"
from traditional and cable TV, and switching to other sources, such as
Netflix and online material.
My background in statistics and data analysis sent up a red flag when I read
that statement: 30% of daily viewing time is quite a bit of time! Yes, there
are some demographics that would spend 30%, but 30% across all demographics?
I guess I could pay $499 to purchase the Forrester report and hopefully see
their data, but that's a bit out of my budget.
Can any listmembers with knowledge about US captioning regulations comment
on the brief? Aside from the "30%" claim, I'm wondering if the brief is
accurate enough to give communication managers who need a brief summary
about US accessibility requirements and online video.
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Andrews, David B (DEED)
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 9:40AM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
I understand -- part of what we need is tools that produce PDF's need to do a better job, as most people don't know a lot about this stuff. I went to the 3playmedia.com web site and left them a long message via their contact us link.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Chagnon | PubCom
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:23 AM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
Checking the PDF's metadata, it appears that the accessibility problems were caused by
1) an older version of Word was used to create the source document.
2) an older version of Acrobat PDF Maker (version 10) was used to convert the Word file to PDF.
3) an under-trained person made the document.
In other words, outdated software and user errors.
At first glance, yes I agree that it's ironic that their PDF isn't accessible.
But then again, they're experts at video accessibility, not document or website accessibility. Although there are many facets of accessibility that span across those 3 types of communication, it's difficult to be an expert in all of them.
So although they may know the ins and outs of making an accessible video for You Tube, that doesn't guarantee they know anything about how to write, design, structure and format a Word document so that it creates an accessible PDF.
-Bevi Chagnon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508 Accessibility.
New Sec. 508 Workshop & EPUBs Tour in 2013 - www.Workshop.Pubcom.com
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andrews, David B
(DEED)
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:38 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
It is indeed ironic that a PDF about accessibility is itself mostly inaccessible! For JAWS users, the PDF is all but useless. It contains text, but the words are all run together, which some desktop publishing programs seem to do when they spit out PDF's. You technical experts will know better than I why this is, but comprehension would involve reviewing word by word to sort it out!
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Chagnon | PubCom
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 12:03 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
This brief about online video captioning requirements provides a succinct overview of the accessibility requirements for video content on the web as well as devices.
(warning: this PDF from 3 Play Media is not fully accessible, but at least the tag tree has headings and structure) http://info.3playmedia.com/rs/3playmedia/images/CVAA-Brief.pdf
I'm wondering how accurate the briefing paper is because one of its statistical claims caught my interest.
In the brief, they state "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their daily viewing time watching online video" and the footnote cites Forester research that pitches their findings that Americans are "cutting the cord"
from traditional and cable TV, and switching to other sources, such as Netflix and online material.
My background in statistics and data analysis sent up a red flag when I read that statement: 30% of daily viewing time is quite a bit of time! Yes, there are some demographics that would spend 30%, but 30% across all demographics?
I guess I could pay $499 to purchase the Forrester report and hopefully see their data, but that's a bit out of my budget.
Can any listmembers with knowledge about US captioning regulations comment on the brief? Aside from the "30%" claim, I'm wondering if the brief is accurate enough to give communication managers who need a brief summary about US accessibility requirements and online video.
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508 Accessibility.
From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 10:13AM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
I corrected the most egregious accessibility errors in the PDF, but due to
copyright issues, I won't post it on the list.
If anyone would like to read the PDF, contact me off list and I'll send you
my accessible version.
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
New Sec. 508 Workshop & EPUBs Tour in 2013 - www.Workshop.Pubcom.com
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andrews, David B
(DEED)
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 11:41 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
I understand -- part of what we need is tools that produce PDF's need to do
a better job, as most people don't know a lot about this stuff. I went to
the 3playmedia.com web site and left them a long message via their contact
us link.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Chagnon | PubCom
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:23 AM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
Checking the PDF's metadata, it appears that the accessibility problems were
caused by
1) an older version of Word was used to create the source document.
2) an older version of Acrobat PDF Maker (version 10) was used to convert
the Word file to PDF.
3) an under-trained person made the document.
In other words, outdated software and user errors.
At first glance, yes I agree that it's ironic that their PDF isn't
accessible.
But then again, they're experts at video accessibility, not document or
website accessibility. Although there are many facets of accessibility that
span across those 3 types of communication, it's difficult to be an expert
in all of them.
So although they may know the ins and outs of making an accessible video for
You Tube, that doesn't guarantee they know anything about how to write,
design, structure and format a Word document so that it creates an
accessible PDF.
-Bevi Chagnon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
New Sec. 508 Workshop & EPUBs Tour in 2013 - www.Workshop.Pubcom.com
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andrews, David B
(DEED)
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:38 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
It is indeed ironic that a PDF about accessibility is itself mostly
inaccessible! For JAWS users, the PDF is all but useless. It contains
text, but the words are all run together, which some desktop publishing
programs seem to do when they spit out PDF's. You technical experts will
know better than I why this is, but comprehension would involve reviewing
word by word to sort it out!
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Chagnon | PubCom
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 12:03 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
This brief about online video captioning requirements provides a succinct
overview of the accessibility requirements for video content on the web as
well as devices.
(warning: this PDF from 3 Play Media is not fully accessible, but at least
the tag tree has headings and structure)
http://info.3playmedia.com/rs/3playmedia/images/CVAA-Brief.pdf
I'm wondering how accurate the briefing paper is because one of its
statistical claims caught my interest.
In the brief, they state "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their
daily viewing time watching online video" and the footnote cites Forester
research that pitches their findings that Americans are "cutting the cord"
from traditional and cable TV, and switching to other sources, such as
Netflix and online material.
My background in statistics and data analysis sent up a red flag when I read
that statement: 30% of daily viewing time is quite a bit of time! Yes, there
are some demographics that would spend 30%, but 30% across all demographics?
I guess I could pay $499 to purchase the Forrester report and hopefully see
their data, but that's a bit out of my budget.
Can any listmembers with knowledge about US captioning regulations comment
on the brief? Aside from the "30%" claim, I'm wondering if the brief is
accurate enough to give communication managers who need a brief summary
about US accessibility requirements and online video.
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Jennifer Sutton
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 11:24AM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
WebAIMers:
I'm taking it upon myself to contact 3Play Media to send them a link
to this discussion thread. I'm using the contact form on their site.
Bevi, maybe you can get some business, as a result. <smile>
It seems to me that voicing concerns about a company's documents on a
list where there's no guarantee that that that company will see them
may not accomplish the goals I imagine we all may have in mind.
If you're on the list, 3Play Media folks, apologies for the email clutter.
Best,
Jennifer
From: Karen Sorensen
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 12:31PM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
I am a fan of 3Play and this WebAIM discussion list. I think this was a
fair and balanced exchange on the 3Play white paper. And I love that people
thought to contact 3Play. 3Play has provided very responsive and high
quality captioning services to our college. I'm sure they welcome fair and
balanced feedback.
Karen M. Sorensen
Accessibility Advocate for Online Courses
www.pcc.edu/access
Portland Community College
971-722-4720
*"The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone
regardless of disability is an essential aspect.* Tim Berners-Lee
From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 12:49PM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
Jennifer wrote: " Bevi, maybe you can get some business, as a result.
<smile>"
That would be nice!
But back to my original question...is the white paper accurate? Is it worth
passing along to our clients as an introductory overview of CVAA?
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
- It's our 32nd year!
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jennifer Sutton
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:24 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
WebAIMers:
I'm taking it upon myself to contact 3Play Media to send them a link to this
discussion thread. I'm using the contact form on their site.
Bevi, maybe you can get some business, as a result. <smile>
It seems to me that voicing concerns about a company's documents on a list
where there's no guarantee that that that company will see them may not
accomplish the goals I imagine we all may have in mind.
If you're on the list, 3Play Media folks, apologies for the email clutter.
Best,
Jennifer
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Jared Smith
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 12:58PM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
Bevi wrote:
> But back to my original question...is the white paper accurate?
The article states, "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their
daily viewing time watching online video." I don't know why they would
misrepresent this statistic. Perhaps you interpreted this to mean "30%
of their day", which would clearly not be correct. I suspect that
viewing time is probably defined as time spent viewing media (or
something similar) and that 30% of that time is spent watching online
video.
Jared
From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 1:29PM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
Let me restate my original question:
Is the white paper's overview about CVAA requirements accurate?
The "30%" was just an aside where I noted that this statement is ambiguous
at best. They quoted research from Forrester, a large, well-respected
research house on marketing statistics, but left out the demographic data -
which age group, which population, etc. Without the demographic data from
Forrester, that quote is ridiculous: there's still a sizable portion of the
American population that doesn't even have Internet access at all, so how
could they spend 30% of their viewing time watching cat videos and streaming
Netflix?
With a long history as a managing editor and art director, this type of
error makes me question the validity of the entire white paper.
However, the Forrester reference was just a quote in passing, not the main
story of 3 Play's white paper.
So, in spite of the misleading "30%" quote about the Forrester research or
the inaccessible PDF, my main question is: how accurate is the rest of the
white paper? The white paper is discussing CVAA legislation, due dates for
compliance, and other related info.
Given how highly Karen Sorenson spoke of them, I'm hoping 3 Play got the
rest of their information correct!
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
- It's our 32nd year!
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:59 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
Bevi wrote:
> But back to my original question...is the white paper accurate?
The article states, "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their daily
viewing time watching online video." I don't know why they would
misrepresent this statistic. Perhaps you interpreted this to mean "30% of
their day", which would clearly not be correct. I suspect that viewing time
is probably defined as time spent viewing media (or something similar) and
that 30% of that time is spent watching online video.
Jared
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Ryan E. Benson
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2013 3:50PM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | Next message →
>Is the white paper's overview about CVAA requirements accurate?
I didn't read the whole thing, but it looks like parts of it was taken
from: http://www.fcc.gov/guides/captioning-internet-video-programming
>Given how highly Karen Sorenson spoke of them, I'm hoping 3 Play got the
rest of their information correct!
I need to reach back out to them. I think their solution for captioning is
pretty cool, however had accessibility issues for the delivery. Most of the
controls in their wrapper/player were not labeled, and caused focus trap if
my memory is correct. I looked at it over a year ago, so things could have
changed.
No endorsement is implied.
--
Ryan E. Benson
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Chagnon | PubCom < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
> Let me restate my original question:
> Is the white paper's overview about CVAA requirements accurate?
>
> The "30%" was just an aside where I noted that this statement is ambiguous
> at best. They quoted research from Forrester, a large, well-respected
> research house on marketing statistics, but left out the demographic data -
> which age group, which population, etc. Without the demographic data from
> Forrester, that quote is ridiculous: there's still a sizable portion of the
> American population that doesn't even have Internet access at all, so how
> could they spend 30% of their viewing time watching cat videos and
> streaming
> Netflix?
>
> With a long history as a managing editor and art director, this type of
> error makes me question the validity of the entire white paper.
>
> However, the Forrester reference was just a quote in passing, not the main
> story of 3 Play's white paper.
>
> So, in spite of the misleading "30%" quote about the Forrester research or
> the inaccessible PDF, my main question is: how accurate is the rest of the
> white paper? The white paper is discussing CVAA legislation, due dates for
> compliance, and other related info.
>
>
>
> *Given how highly Karen Sorenson spoke of them, I'm hoping 3 Play got the
> rest of their information correct! *
>
> - Bevi Chagnon
> - PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
> - Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
> Accessibility.
> - It's our 32nd year!
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:59 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
>
> Bevi wrote:
>
> > But back to my original question...is the white paper accurate?
>
> The article states, "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their daily
> viewing time watching online video." I don't know why they would
> misrepresent this statistic. Perhaps you interpreted this to mean "30% of
> their day", which would clearly not be correct. I suspect that viewing time
> is probably defined as time spent viewing media (or something similar) and
> that 30% of that time is spent watching online video.
>
> Jared
> > > messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
> > > >
From: Andrews, David B (DEED)
Date: Fri, Nov 22 2013 7:35AM
Subject: Re: CVAA and video captioning
← Previous message | No next message
I heard back from the company, and they said the accessibility problems were an oversight. They apologized, said they would gfix it, and would send me a copy.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Chagnon | PubCom
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:29 PM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
Let me restate my original question:
Is the white paper's overview about CVAA requirements accurate?
The "30%" was just an aside where I noted that this statement is ambiguous at best. They quoted research from Forrester, a large, well-respected research house on marketing statistics, but left out the demographic data - which age group, which population, etc. Without the demographic data from Forrester, that quote is ridiculous: there's still a sizable portion of the American population that doesn't even have Internet access at all, so how could they spend 30% of their viewing time watching cat videos and streaming Netflix?
With a long history as a managing editor and art director, this type of error makes me question the validity of the entire white paper.
However, the Forrester reference was just a quote in passing, not the main story of 3 Play's white paper.
So, in spite of the misleading "30%" quote about the Forrester research or the inaccessible PDF, my main question is: how accurate is the rest of the white paper? The white paper is discussing CVAA legislation, due dates for compliance, and other related info.
Given how highly Karen Sorenson spoke of them, I'm hoping 3 Play got the rest of their information correct!
- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508 Accessibility.
- It's our 32nd year!
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:59 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] CVAA and video captioning
Bevi wrote:
> But back to my original question...is the white paper accurate?
The article states, "Americans currently spend nearly 30% of their daily viewing time watching online video." I don't know why they would misrepresent this statistic. Perhaps you interpreted this to mean "30% of their day", which would clearly not be correct. I suspect that viewing time is probably defined as time spent viewing media (or something similar) and that 30% of that time is spent watching online video.
Jared