[whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Hi everybody, For the last 2 months, I have been investigating means of satisfying video accessibility needs through Ogg in Mozilla/Firefox for HTML5. You will find a lot of information about our work at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Accessibility/Video_Accessibility and in the archives of the Ogg acc

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: Take this as an example: http://example.com/video.ogv"; controls> Could this combining of resources be achieved instead with SMIL or some other existing format? If there is already a format for doing this then I think HTML should avoid re-inventing it unle

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What are the advantages of doing this directly in HTML rather than having > the "src" attribute point at some sort of compound media document? The general point here is that subtitle data is in current practice often creat

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >> >> Take this as an example: >> >> http://example.com/video.ogv"; controls> >> >> > src="german.dfxp"> >> > src="japanese.smil"> >> > src="translation_webservice/fr/caption.srt"> >> >> > > Coul

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: I'm interested to hear people's opinions on these ideas. I agree with Ralph and think having a simple, explicit mechanism at the html level is worthwhile - and very open and explicit to a web author. Having a redirection through a ROE-type file on the server is more opaque

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Am Montag, den 08.12.2008, 21:20 -0800 schrieb Martin Atkins: > My concern is that if the only thing linking the various streams > together is the HTML document then the streams are less useful outside > of a web browser context. If there is a separate resource containing the > description of ho

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 9:20 PM, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My concern is that if the only thing linking the various streams together is > the HTML document then the streams are less useful outside of a web browser > context. Absolutely. This proposal places an additional burden on

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > >> >> I'm interested to hear people's opinions on these ideas. I agree with >> Ralph and think having a simple, explicit mechanism at the html level >> is worthwhile - and very open and explicit to a

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

I heard some complaints about there not being any implementation of the suggestions I made. So here goes: 1. out-of-band There is an example of using srt with ogg in a out-of-band approach here: http://v2v.cc/~j/jquery.srt/ You will need Firefox3.1 to play it. The syntax of what Jan implemented i

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Silvia Pfeiffer ha scritto: I heard some complaints about there not being any implementation of the suggestions I made. So here goes: 1. out-of-band There is an example of using srt with ogg in a out-of-band approach here: http://v2v.cc/~j/jquery.srt/ You will need Firefox3.1 to play it. The sy

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:59 AM, Calogero Alex Baldacchino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyway, the use of subtitles in conjunction with screen readers might be > problematic: a deeper synchronization with the media might be needed in > order to have the text read just during voice pauses, to des

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Also, for those interested, metavid and mv_embed are examples of use of ROE: http://metavid.org/w/index.php/Mv_embed Metavid uses for clean remote embedding of multiple text/video/audio tracks in a single xml encapsulation. An example of such embeds is here: http://metavid-mike.blogspot.com/

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Silvia Pfeiffer ha scritto: On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:59 AM, Calogero Alex Baldacchino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Anyway, the use of subtitles in conjunction with screen readers might be problematic: a deeper synchronization with the media might be needed in order to have the text read just d

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

At 21:33 +1300 9/12/08, Robert O'Callahan wrote: For what it's worth, loading an intermediate document of some new type which references other streams to be loaded adds a lot of complexity to the browser implementation. It creates new states that the decoder can be in, and introduces new failu

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

And now we have a first demo of the proposed syntax in action. Michael Dale implemented SRT support like this: Michael writes: > the demo: (tested on IE, Firefox, Safari ... with varying degrees of success > ;) > http://metavid.org/w/extensions/MetavidWiki/s

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Yea as Silvia outlines in the intro to this thread we will likely continue to see external timed text files "winning out" over muxed timed text. "Its just more flexible" ... Javascript embedding libraries which are widely used today for flash video will be even more widely used with the emerg

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Dave Singer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 21:33 +1300 9/12/08, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > >> For what it's worth, loading an intermediate document of some new type >> which references other streams to be loaded adds a lot of complexity to the >> browser implemen

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

At 14:40 +1300 11/12/08, Robert O'Callahan wrote: On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Dave Singer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: At 21:33 +1300 9/12/08, Robert O'Callahan wrote: For what it's worth, loading an intermediate document of some new type which references other

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Another implementation comes from the W3C TimedText working group: They have a test suite for DFXP files at http://www.w3.org/2008/12/dfxp-testsuite/web-framework/START.html . Philippe just announced that he added HTML5 video tag support using the javascript file that Jan had written for srt supp

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

I have carefully read all the feedback in this thread concerning associating text with video, for various purposes such as captions, annotations, etc. Taking a step back as far as I can tell there are two axes: where the timed text comes from, and how it is rendered. Where it comes from, it s

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Hi Ian, Thanks for taking the time to go through all the options, analyse and understand them - especially on your birthday! :-) Much appreciated! I agree with your analysis and the 6 options you have identified. However, I disagree slightly with the conclusions you have come to - mostly from a

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Silvia Pfeiffer ha scritto: Hi Ian, Thanks for taking the time to go through all the options, analyse and understand them - especially on your birthday! :-) Much appreciated! Than, happy birthday to Ian! [...] The only real issue that we have with separate files is that the captions may g

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, Calogero Alex Baldacchino wrote: > > A flying thought: why not thinking also to a further option for > embedding everything in a sort of "all-in-one" html page generated on > the fly when downloading, making of it a global container for video and > text to be consumed by UA

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > > > > 6. Timed text stored in a separate file, which is then fetched and > > parsed by the Web page, and which is then rendered by the Web page. > > For case 6, while it works for deaf people, we actually create an > accessibility nightmare for blind

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Hi Ian, Great to see the new efforts to move the subtitle/caption/karaoke issues forward! I actually have a contract with Mozilla starting this month to help solve this, so I am more than grateful that you have proposed some ideas in this space. On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Ian Hickson wrote

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:58:30 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: Hi Ian, Great to see the new efforts to move the subtitle/caption/karaoke issues forward! I actually have a contract with Mozilla starting this month to help solve this, so I am more than grateful that you have proposed some ideas i

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

Thanks for the analysis, but two pieces of feedback: 1) Though sub-titles and captions are the most common accessibility issue for audio/video content, they are not the only one. There are people: -- who cannot see, and need audio description of video -- who cannot hear, and prefer sign lan

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:31 PM, David Singer wrote: > Thanks for the analysis, but two pieces of feedback: > > 1) Though sub-titles and captions are the most common accessibility issue > for audio/video content, they are not the only one.  There are people: >  -- who cannot see, and need audio de

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:58:30 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer > wrote: >> > 3. Timed text stored in a separate file, which is then parsed by the > user agent and rendered as part of the video automatically by the > browser. > >>

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

At 23:28 +1000 16/07/09, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > 2) I think the environment can and should help select and configure type-1 resources, where it can. It shouldn't need to be always a manual step by the user interacting with the media player. That is, I don't see why we cannot have the mar

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 11:56 PM, David Singer wrote: > At 23:28  +1000 16/07/09, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >> >>  > 2) I think the environment can and should help select and configure >> type-1 >>> >>>  resources, where it can.  It shouldn't need to be always a manual step >>> by >>>  the user intera

Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on video accessibility

At 8:36 +1000 17/07/09, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: I just noticed that the "media" attribute is already part of the "source" element definition in HTML5. I wonder which browsers have implemented this attribute. After having looked at http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/, my understanding is th