This Wiki page is edited by participants of the HTML Accessibility Task Force. It does not necessarily represent consensus and it may have incorrect information or information that is not supported by other Task Force participants, WAI, or W3C. It may also have some very useful information.

MAUR Comment Processing

From HTML accessibility task force Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Link to Comments on Media Accessibility User Requirements

Below are notes from the round of processing started on 14 APR 2014, divided by those that are partially processed, still outstanding, or completely processed.

In Progress

Comment 375

3.7 Enhanced captions/subtitles [ECC-4] Vague
"This could be realised through a hint on the text cue or even the whole track."
Originally questioned necessity of this section, but determined it was still valid. Still need to process original comment
4.1 [KA-1] Define "unique focus object"
Consider pointing to UAAG Def for Focusable Element http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG20/#def-focusable-element -Mark

Comment 450

This was mostly editorial with the following exceptions:

Section 1, Media Accessibility CheckList
Suggestion: The media accessibility checklist is a treasure trove of detail for developers and implementers. This seems like a good place to mention something like: "Developers and implementers may want to refer directly to this checklist when implementing audio and video elements". {Paul, Feb 4, 2014}
I am in favor of this change - Mark
Section 3.1, Described video
DV-7: Clarification: Is the term "provider" meant to be the same as an author or user, or something else? Provider may be interpreted as broadcaster or cable company. {Paul, Feb 4, 2014}
Given that provider is not used anywhere else in this document and this section primarily distinguishes between author and user, I would think the original intention in this context was to give the user control - Mark
Section 3.5, Content navigation by content structure, Navigating ancillary content
Suggestion: The Mozilla Popcorn examples flow perfectly with this section...however, should specific examples like this be included? They might appear dated to future readers of this document. {Paul, Feb 4, 2014}
2 out of the 3 links are already broken. Their new locations can be found. HOwever, this indicates the instability of these resources. I tend to agree with Paul that we should not point to specific examples. There are likely better examples out there already. - Mark

Processed

Comment 375

Accepted
Editorial
  • 2.7
  • 2.8
  • 3.2 [TVD-2]
  • 3.6 [CC-20]
  • 3.7
  • 3.7 [ECC-2]
  • 4.1 [KA-6]
  • 4.4 [PP-4]
  • 4.5
  • 4.7 [VP-1]

http://www.w3.org/2014/04/14-html-a11y-media-minutes.html#item04

New language for 3.3 and 3.4 was proposed by Janina Sajka and accepted by the Media Sub Group: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Apr/0081.html http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-html-a11y-media-minutes.html#item06

New language for 3.7 was proposed by Mark Sadecki and accepted by the Media Sub Group: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Apr/0070.html http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-html-a11y-media-minutes.html#item07

Rejected

3.8 Para 2 and SL-3 were rejected. Both were determined to be helpful for implementers.

Comment 377

The paragraph that immediately follows the first bulleted list includes a lot of statements about DOM that seem misplaced. Is the author using this term synonymously with the terms "structural" or "hierarchical"? If so, it'd be better to use one or those terms. If not, the reference to DOM is unclear and this paragraph could be rewritten.

Comment 381

I would include that the requirement be that controls must not only be scriptable, but the playback mechanism must be able to react to AT-triggered control of the media track. (Indie UI may apply here.)
  • Discussed on 12 MAY 2014
  • Determined to be out of scope for this document and is already sufficiently handled by Javascript API in HTML5

Comment 450

  • Multi-part comment from Paul Schantz
  • Comment 450
  • All editorial comments accepted

DRAFT Comment Responses

Comment 360

Title
Need to ensure that descriptions are stored with local recordings for later use
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=360
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2012JanMar/0002.html
Response
 Hi Mark, 
Thank you for providing feedback on Media Accessibility User Requirements. Your proposal to require that descriptions be stored locally if the primary media is saved locally was carefully considered by the group. We have determined that such requirements are beyond the scope of this document, which focuses on what should be presented to the user. The Media Accessibility User Requirements do not prescribe how that content must be created. We think recommendations like yours could accompany supporting materials prepared by other organizations. This exact Use Case is currently under consideration in the Web & TV Interest Group, for example.
Kind regards,
Mark Sadecki
On behalf of the Media Accessibility Task Force and the Protocols and Formats Working Group

Comments 375 - 381

Title(s)
Editorial Feedback on 3 Jan 2012 draft of Media Accessibility User Reqs
3.2 Text Video Description
3.5 Content Navigation.
3.6 Captioning [CC-13]
3.6 Captioning [CC-21]
3.8 Sign Translation.
4.1 [KA-3]
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=375
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=376
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=377
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=378
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=379
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=380
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=381
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2012AprJun/0001.html
Response
 James,
Thank you providing such thoughtful feedback on the Media Accessibility User Requirements document. Your comments pointed out many valuable editorial improvements as well as a number of thoughtful requests for substantive change. We have accepted all of your editorial requests, with the exception of a few noted below. Our individual responses to your substantive comments follow.
## Editorial (all accepted with the following exceptions)
### 3.8 Sign Translation. Para 2. The reference to "alpha-blending technology" and 3.8 Sign Translation. [SL-3] Ditto on the "alpha-blended overlay". The Media Sub Group believes that the terms used are well established terms used in the industry and their use in this document is helpful for implementers. ## Substantive ### 3.2 Text Video Description
We did not accept this change because TVD is never an audio track, it is always in text format. It is delivered in a format like WebVTT or TTML that meets these requirements. It is only turned into other formats client side.
### 3.5 Content Navigation.
We accepted this comment and new language that clarifies the structural relationship without relying on the concept of the DOM was drafted:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Apr/0070.html
http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-html-a11y-media-minutes.html#item07
### 3.6 Captioning [CC-13]
TODO: I do not think this edit has been made, needs to be verified. If not, suggested edit is needed "Alternate action taken Evidence does exist for the preference, for instance http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/about-dyslexia/adults-and-business/dyslexia-and-specific-learning-difficulties-in-adu.html. However we will reword the requirement to be clearer." ### 3.6 Captioning [CC-21]
The difference between the eneumerated guidelines and any introductory text should now be more clear. ### 3.8 Sign Translation.
This requirement was intended to drive spec support and the HTML5 now supports the synchronization of multiple video files. ### 4.1 [KA-3]
TODO: I don't think this comment was processed. If not, suggested edit is needed. Please let us know if you are satisfied with this response and actions taken.
Kind regards,
Mark Sadecki
On behalf of the Media Accessibility Task Force and the Protocols and Formats Working Group

Comment 389

Title
EOWG Comments from Jenifer Sutton
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=389
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0014.html
Response
 We have implemented a variety of changes to address your comments.  Specifically:
 A. This section has been removed from the document.
B. We are aware that the concept of mixing in separate channels may be new to some readers. We hope that it becomes clear with the detail later in the document, but do not want to expand upon it at this point because it would duplicate material and be distracting.
C. Changed to use 'challenge' or related terms.
D. Fixed reference.
E. Added text.
F. Linking out to specific sections is challenging but we have done so where it was feasible.
G. Made the suggested change.
H. Unfortunately we cannot think of a way to make it any clearer. If media controls are exposed to the AT and there ns a way to disable autoplay, then the AT will make that setting available so that users can control when something should be played.
I. It means the user agent must not put captions on top of the controls for the media.

Comment 390

Title
EOWG Comments from Char James-Tanney
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=390
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0019.html
Response
 There are certainly many areas of this document where the language is complex.
 Rewriting it without losing (important) meaning would be difficult.
 We have attempted to make some changes where those changes would not effect 
 the overall meaning.

NOTE: The commented suggests that we provide some mention of transcription in section 2.4. I have not addressed this. -Shane

Comment 391

Title
EOWG Comments from Char James-Tanney
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=391
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0019.html
Response
 This issue is identical to issue 390 (duplicate).

Comment 392, 393, 395

Title
EOWG Comments from Wayne Dick
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=392
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=393
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=395
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0020.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0021.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0028.html
Response
 Hi Wayne,
Thank you for taking the time to provide such thoughtful feedback and advice on the Media Accessibility Requirements document. Your input on improving support for users with low vision was particularly helpful. We accepted most of your comments verbatim when suggested text was provided. We also carefully considered your suggestions to make text content for blind users also available for users with low vision. We did not make any of your suggested changes to Extended Video Description since that is an audio-only solution and not text based. However, we did make improvements to the Transcript section based on that feedback. Details of the changes can be found in the following commits:
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/6edd61de210f2406b5e68f9e59f1bdea17e06dc6 * https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/3b574e97c819aa1c884fc24008f285d1baa5d7d2 * https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/4dc3a06b14555280ea2e3b1ec66654bf09caa80d * https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/53ee33fbdf3d1d58de582047a487a3341e9ecef8
Please let us know if you are satisfied with this response and action.
Kind regards,
Mark Sadecki
On behalf of the Media Accessibility Task Force and the Protocols and Formats Working Group


Comment 394

Title
EOWG Comments from Andrew Arch
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=394
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0026.html
Response
 Hi Andrew, 
Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback [1] on Media Accessibility User Requirements. We did not glean enough specific suggestions from your comments to make edits based on them. Some of your comments may have been addressed based on feedback we've gotten from others. We invite you to review the latest draft of this document [2].
Please let us know if you are satisfied with this response and actions taken.
Kind regards,
Mark Sadecki
On behalf of the Media Accessibility Task Force and the Protocols and Formats Working Group [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2011OctDec/0026.html [2] https://w3c.github.io/pfwg/media-accessibility-reqs/

Comment 396

Title
EOWG request to align "Accessible Media Requirements by Type of Disability" with How People with Disabilities Use the Web
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=396
Comment Archive
Not Found
Response
 Hi Shawn,
Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback on Media Accessibility User Requirements. We would be happy to consider any alternative wording that you provide in regards to Section 2. Accessible Media Requirements by Type of Disability. We look forward to additional feedback from you.


 Kind regards,
Mark Sadecki
On behalf of the Media Accessibility Task Force and the Protocols and Formats Working Group

Comment 450

Title
Feedback on Media Accessibility User Requirements 14 DEC 2011 ED
Comment Detail
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/comments/details?comment_id=450
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2014AprJun/0014.html
Response
 Hi Paul, 
Thank you for providing feedback [1] on Media Accessibility User Requirements. Your editorial comments were very helpful in making the document more clear, accurate, and precise. We accepted all of your comments and have incorporated the changes into the latest editor's draft:
http://w3c.github.io/pfwg/media-accessibility-reqs/
Please let us know if you are satisfied with this response and action.
Kind regards,
Mark Sadecki
On behalf of the Media Accessibility Task Force and the Protocols and Formats Working Group
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2014AprJun/0014.html === Comment from Paul Cotton ===
Title
Media Accessibility User Requirements editorial comments
Comment Archive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Jul/0024.html
Response
 Hi Paul, 
Thank you for providing feedback [1] on Media Accessibility User Requirements. Your editorial comments were very helpful in making the document more clear, accurate, and precise. We accepted all of your comments and have incorporated the changes into the latest editor's draft:
http://w3c.github.io/pfwg/media-accessibility-reqs/
The individual commits can be reviewed here:
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/5a66475ae3676e4dd1aa808d6248ee88301e8368
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/55e2256eadca3d1bc6a5405125c7928885b7d282
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/40fa41dcd9b08a386dadecd612db0e6bb601273f
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/ee95fd6f6b14f9a2b6ba45636930b30396d72142
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/d61408313d30eb79dc8cf2851b221ec21c6f9423
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/fb56f94c2cea0838e4880b22056a78efc5c833d4
* https://github.com/w3c/pfwg/commit/b5040777798e27e3f7727ca230f649d5a6b0d998
Please let us know if you are satisfied with this response and action.
Kind regards,
Mark Sadecki
On behalf of the Media Accessibility Task Force and the Protocols and Formats Working Group
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Jul/0024.html