2
edits
Accessibility/Video Accessibility: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Accessibility/Video Accessibility (view source)
Revision as of 02:01, 1 October 2008
, 1 October 2008→Background: the issues around video accessibility
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
Video on the Web is a complex topic, not only from a technical, but also from a political and patent viewpoint. Even HTML5 and the WHATWG haven't figured out what baseline codec to recommend yet. | Video on the Web is a complex topic, not only from a technical, but also from a political and patent viewpoint. Even HTML5 and the WHATWG haven't figured out what baseline codec to recommend yet. | ||
Video accessibility is an even more complex issue for similar reasons and because it is so simple to define a text format for captions, while complicated to define a text format that supports all video accessibility requirements. Diverse interests have created the plethora of existing formats, interest e.g. by old TV (IEEE, SMPTE, EBU), online video professionals (MPEG), Web (W3C TT, SMIL), set-top boxes, games, IPTV, iTV (MHP), the Anime community, or the DVD ripping community. | Video accessibility is an even more complex issue for similar reasons and because it is so simple to define a text format for captions, while complicated to define a text format that supports all video accessibility requirements. Diverse interests have created the plethora of existing formats, interest e.g. by old TV (IEEE, SMPTE, EBU, CEA, ATSC), online video professionals (MPEG), Web (W3C TT, SMIL), set-top boxes, games, IPTV, iTV (MHP), the Anime community, or the DVD ripping community. | ||
The choice of textual format for video accessibility is a complex one with too many insufficient formats to choose from, e.g. QTtext, SubRip, SAMI, SMIL, DFXP, DVB, TimedText, EBU, SCC, Kate, CMML, SSA, MicroDVD, USF, SubViewer, or VOBSub (see http://autocaption.com/resource_specifications_format_list.html for a more complete list. Note: this list is a combination of company names, codecs, authoring tools and other extraneous info and is not a comprehensive list of actual caption file formats used presently on TV or on-line). Also, support in frameworks is inconsistent - Adobe Flash for example support a proprietary CuePoints format (http://www.actionscript.org/resources/articles/518/1/Creating-subtitles-for-flash-video-using-XML/Page1.html) and a simple version of the W3C TimedText format ("DFXP") (http://livedocs.adobe.com/flash/9.0/ActionScriptLangRefV3/TimedTextTags.html). YouTube allow submission of srt and sub file formats, but internally roll their own format. | The choice of textual format for video accessibility is a complex one with too many insufficient formats to choose from, e.g. QTtext, SubRip, SAMI, SMIL, DFXP, DVB, TimedText, EBU, SCC, Kate, CMML, SSA, MicroDVD, USF, SubViewer, or VOBSub (see http://autocaption.com/resource_specifications_format_list.html for a more complete list. Note: this list is a combination of company names, codecs, authoring tools and other extraneous info and is not a comprehensive list of actual caption file formats used presently on TV or on-line). Also, support in frameworks is inconsistent - Adobe Flash for example support a proprietary CuePoints format (http://www.actionscript.org/resources/articles/518/1/Creating-subtitles-for-flash-video-using-XML/Page1.html) and a simple version of the W3C TimedText format ("DFXP") (http://livedocs.adobe.com/flash/9.0/ActionScriptLangRefV3/TimedTextTags.html). YouTube allow submission of srt and sub file formats, but internally roll their own format. | ||