New Test for media alternatives for text #388
Conversation
exceptions for media alternatives for text added to captions and AD tests
_baselines/17SyncMedia.md
Outdated
| @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ Evaluation of captions and audio descriptions to assess its equivalence to synch | |||
|
|
|||
| **Baseline Test ID:** 17.4-CaptionsPrerecorded | |||
| #### Identify Content | |||
| <p id="4IC">Pre-recorded synchronized multimedia that is not a media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such.</p> | |||
| <p id="4IC">Pre-recorded synchronized multimedia that is not clearly labeled as a media alternative for text.</p> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
visual and programmatic?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, your suggestion is much better.
Do you want the visual and programmatic included in the updated statement? The programmatic part would mean "media alternative for text" (or similar) has to be in the accessible name/desc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Depends if "labeled" is usually understood to mean those already. Just wanted a way to clarify it if asked. A note would also work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not think "clearly labeled as such" means the accessible name. I think this is a visual label or description.
This is ACT's proposed rule for Audio element content is media alternative for text. It doesn't check programmatic label..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Then should we specify "Visual" for clarity?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about something like this in the Assumptions section for appropriate rules:
Audio-only, video-only, and synchronized media can be "clearly labeled" as alternatives for text in various ways, including text alternatives and text descriptions. At a minimum, a visual label must be provided.
kengdoj
requested review from
KMSOC and
cliffbert
and removed request for
cliffbert
closes #382