Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: On 5/27/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] I don't think this is a very natural use of the q element. A thumbnail isn't really like a quote of a prose fragment. Consider that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. True... but you don't have to have the q elements put quotes around the thumbnail. Please refer to the following to see how to get rid of it... http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2007-May/009703.html This is similar to the problem we have with using abbr for dates. Some browsers put a border under the abbr element. We get rid of the bottom border some browser put under the abbr element (when we use it for dates) with a little extra inline style. We can do something similar here for the q element used for video thumbnails. Hmm. I think Maciej does have a strong point about interoperability here. Removing the quotation punctuation with CSS does not help those with user-designated styles or UAs that ignore such CSS: e.g. text browsers and screen readers. The question to ask yourself is: if you could not remove the quotation punctuation and layout, would you still use q and blockquote? If a screen reader read (for example): quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote That would be rather strange, wouldn't it? As you say above, it is True that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. This suggests that we should not be using q or blockquote for this. Maybe it would be better to use something along the lines of: span class=video-detailsimg class=thumbnail alt=Dorothy encounters the Lion src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg;citea href=http://example.com/thevideo; type=video/quicktimeThe Wizard of Ozz/a/cite/span If you want the full video to be clickable, what you might want is: a rev=thumbnail href=http://example.com/video; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; /a I'm not sure if the rev attribute is being used correctly in your markup. Yeah, the HTML4 spec says the rev and rel imply relationships between the current document and the href, not the anchor's contents and the href. http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#adef-rev -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
On May 28, 2007, at 1:49 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote: Hmm. I think Maciej does have a strong point about interoperability here. Removing the quotation punctuation with CSS does not help those with user-designated styles or UAs that ignore such CSS: e.g. text browsers and screen readers. The question to ask yourself is: if you could not remove the quotation punctuation and layout, would you still use q and blockquote? If a screen reader read (for example): quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote That would be rather strange, wouldn't it? I dunno, I think that might be helpful. It's semantic information that it's a portion of a larger document. Using a span tag as you suggest provides the UA with zero semantic information. I suspect having alt tags that just link to a video which perhaps they don't want to watch is annoying to people with screen readers -- although I think I would need a bit more data about how screen readers work and how they're used to really say anything else. -Colin ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote: Yeah, the HTML4 spec says the rev and rel imply relationships between the current document and the href, not the anchor's contents and the href. http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#adef-rev I think eRDF's approach is worth noting here - when translated into RDF, rel and rev links relate the current *document* *fragment* to the *href.* It's not quite what the spec says, but I think it's sensible: after all, the href can point to a document fragment, so the rel/rev should also be able to relate to the current document fragment as well. Keith [1] http://research.talis.com/2005/erdf/wiki/Main/RdfInHtml - the canonical description of eRDF [2] http://getsemantic.com/wiki/ERDF - a wiki page about eRDF -- Keith Alexander http://semwebdev.keithalexander.co.uk/blog/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
On May 27, 2007, at 6:55 PM, Paul Wilkins wrote: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#h-12.1.2 My simplified understanding of the relationship between rel and rev is With the rel attribute, the relationship that the linked page has to this link is foo. With the rev attribute, the relationship that this link has from the linked page is foo. Actually, I think that's exactly backwards. But that's part of the reason rev is so confusing. Use previous or next as the link values and you'll understand what's going on. link rel=next should point to the logically next document, so the linked resource's relationship to the current resource is that it is next. What you describe below seems to reflect the same understanding though, so maybe we just disagree on the wording. From: Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: a rev=thumbnail href=http://example.com/video; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; /a I'm not sure if the rev attribute is being used correctly in your markup. Rev defines the reverse link to the current document, not to whatever is encapsulated by the link itself...unless I'm reading the spec wrong This attribute describes the relationship from the current document to the anchor specified by the href attribute http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#edef-A A rel link from the video page to the thumbnail would be thumbnail. So, a rev link on the thumbnail to the video page would also be thumbnail. I've got no problem with using rel and rev values myself, but if you're going to use a a custom link-type that's not actually defined in http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-links then you should use a profile to define what's going on. ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Colin Barrett wrote: On May 28, 2007, at 1:49 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote: [snip] If a screen reader read (for example): quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote That would be rather strange, wouldn't it? I dunno, I think that might be helpful. It's semantic information that it's a portion of a larger document. This is a tempting argument, but in theory and practice a problematic one. q and blockquote are not merely intended to be portions of a larger document but to be /quotations/: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#h-9.2.2 I'm not sure that a thumbnail really is a quotation, although it's clearly conceptually close to one. When people talk of quotations from movies in everyday speech, they are talking about quotations from the dialogue not stills, e.g.: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032138/quotes I don't think quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote would be a human readable hint that it's a thumbnail from a video. Unless you happen to be a microformats guru. ;) Using a span tag as you suggest provides the UA with zero semantic information. I'd prefer to provide zero information than potentially misleading information. I suppose one could prefix the alt with still: though: alt=still: Dorothy encounters the Lion So then you might hear: graphic still Dorothy encounters the Lion link The Wizard of Oz A microformat parser could remove everything up to and including the first colon to get to the alternative text proper. I suspect having alt tags that just link to a video which perhaps they don't want to watch is annoying to people with screen readers -- although I think I would need a bit more data about how screen readers work and how they're used to really say anything else. I believe your suspicion is wrong for three reasons: 1. Most screen reader users are not deaf as well as blind, and many screen readers still have some sight. So most screen reader users are as likely to enjoy watching videos online as you and I. Their big problem with sites like YouTube is that it's too hard to /find/ videos, not to watch them: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2007/05/access_20_interview_mark_prous.shtml 2. Most video formats, include Flash video and Quicktime, can include captioning which mainstream screen readers can push to a braille display for deafblind users. Videos /should/ include captioning and authors should make it clear when they do not: and ideally provide a transcript as an alternative. There are now captioning websites that either make it easy to add captions to online video or will even caption it for you for free on request: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2007/05/captioning_video_gets_easier.shtml 3. Even if a video is completely inaccessible for some reason, screen reader users may use the alternative text to understand why the author is referring to that video, to share the video or thumbnail with sighted friends or colleagues, or to demand an accessible alternative. Just hiding inaccessible materials would produce confusion. On an even more basic technical level: leaving out alt would result in some screen readers reading the image src attribute. Leaving alt blank would result in some screen readers reading the href for any surrounding anchor link when alt provides the only text content for the link, e.g.: a href=http://www.example.com/video;img alt=/a By default, Window-Eyes would read something like: link h t t p colon slash slash w w w dot example dot com slash video Commonly, I think, the user will have reduced the verbosity to strip out most punctuation and only have to suffer: link h t t p w w w example com video Takeaway: include an alt for all images; and always include an alt with actual text if the img is the /sole/ content of the link. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello Benjamin, On 5/28/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: On 5/27/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] I don't think this is a very natural use of the q element. A thumbnail isn't really like a quote of a prose fragment. Consider that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. True... but you don't have to have the q elements put quotes around the thumbnail. Please refer to the following to see how to get rid of it... http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2007-May/009703.html This is similar to the problem we have with using abbr for dates. Some browsers put a border under the abbr element. We get rid of the bottom border some browser put under the abbr element (when we use it for dates) with a little extra inline style. We can do something similar here for the q element used for video thumbnails. Hmm. I think Maciej does have a strong point about interoperability here. Removing the quotation punctuation with CSS does not help those with user-designated styles or UAs that ignore such CSS: e.g. text browsers and screen readers. The question to ask yourself is: if you could not remove the quotation punctuation and layout, would you still use q and blockquote? If a screen reader read (for example): A text browser can NOT see the graphical thumbnail anyways. It will see the alt text of the thumbnail. And putting the alt text in quotes seems OK with me. (It's only the putting the graphical thumbnail in quotes that seems wrong.) Also... a screen reader is going to read the alt text too (instead of the graphical thumbnail). So... in this case too, putting the alt text in quotes seems just fine. So... this seems to be a non-issue. quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote That would be rather strange, wouldn't it? As you say above, it is True that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. This suggests that we should not be using q or blockquote for this. Like I pointed out above, any situation (that you mentioned) that keeps the quotation marks is actually fine doing it, because it will also be seeing/reading the alt text... and NOT doing anything with the graphical thumbnail. So it's a non-issue. See ya Maybe it would be better to use something along the lines of: span class=video-detailsimg class=thumbnail alt=Dorothy encounters the Lion src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg;citea href=http://example.com/thevideo; type=video/quicktimeThe Wizard of Ozz/a/cite/span If you want the full video to be clickable, what you might want is: a rev=thumbnail href=http://example.com/video; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; /a I'm not sure if the rev attribute is being used correctly in your markup. Yeah, the HTML4 spec says the rev and rel imply relationships between the current document and the href, not the anchor's contents and the href. http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#adef-rev -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello Benjamin, Most screen reader users are not deaf as well as blind, and many screen readers still have some sight. So most screen reader users are as likely to enjoy watching videos online as you and I Hmmm... that's a good point. And something I wasn't aware of Perhaps the alt text could be something like... alt=Thumbnail of ... So, for example, we could have... alt=Thumbnail of Tirebiterz episode #12 (Where Tirebiterz is an Internet TV show.) On 5/28/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Colin Barrett wrote: On May 28, 2007, at 1:49 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote: [snip] If a screen reader read (for example): quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote That would be rather strange, wouldn't it? I dunno, I think that might be helpful. It's semantic information that it's a portion of a larger document. This is a tempting argument, but in theory and practice a problematic one. q and blockquote are not merely intended to be portions of a larger document but to be /quotations/: True... but is the abbr element designed for the way Microformats do dates? It seems like the same problem as that isn't it. And if we accept that screen readers can adapt to dates with the abbr element, then why not accept that they can adapt to thumbnails in a q element? http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#h-9.2.2 I'm not sure that a thumbnail really is a quotation, although it's clearly conceptually close to one. When people talk of quotations from movies in everyday speech, they are talking about quotations from the dialogue not stills, e.g.: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032138/quotes I don't think quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote would be a human readable hint that it's a thumbnail from a video. Unless you happen to be a microformats guru. ;) What about what I mentioned above... about using alt text like... alt=Thumbnail of Dorothy encountering the Lion So that would read... quote Thumbnail of Dorothy encountering the Lion end quote Using a span tag as you suggest provides the UA with zero semantic information. I'd prefer to provide zero information than potentially misleading information. I suppose one could prefix the alt with still: though: alt=still: Dorothy encounters the Lion So then you might hear: graphic still Dorothy encounters the Lion link The Wizard of Oz A microformat parser could remove everything up to and including the first colon to get to the alternative text proper. I suspect having alt tags that just link to a video which perhaps they don't want to watch is annoying to people with screen readers -- although I think I would need a bit more data about how screen readers work and how they're used to really say anything else. I believe your suspicion is wrong for three reasons: 1. Most screen reader users are not deaf as well as blind, and many screen readers still have some sight. So most screen reader users are as likely to enjoy watching videos online as you and I. Their big problem with sites like YouTube is that it's too hard to /find/ videos, not to watch them: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2007/05/access_20_interview_mark_prous.shtml 2. Most video formats, include Flash video and Quicktime, can include captioning which mainstream screen readers can push to a braille display for deafblind users. Yeah... I'm actually using a captioning sHTML in a piece of software that hasn't been made public yet. (Perhaps I'll describe it on this list later... and get it reviewed.) See ya Videos /should/ include captioning and authors should make it clear when they do not: and ideally provide a transcript as an alternative. There are now captioning websites that either make it easy to add captions to online video or will even caption it for you for free on request: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2007/05/captioning_video_gets_easier.shtml 3. Even if a video is completely inaccessible for some reason, screen reader users may use the alternative text to understand why the author is referring to that video, to share the video or thumbnail with sighted friends or colleagues, or to demand an accessible alternative. Just hiding inaccessible materials would produce confusion. On an even more basic technical level: leaving out alt would result in some screen readers reading the image src attribute. Leaving alt blank would result in some screen readers reading the href for any surrounding anchor link when alt provides the only text content for the link, e.g.: a href=http://www.example.com/video;img alt=/a By default, Window-Eyes would read something like: link h t t p colon slash slash w w w dot example dot com slash video Commonly, I think, the user will have reduced the verbosity to strip out most punctuation and only have to suffer: link h t t p w w w example com video Takeaway: include an alt for all images; and always include an alt with actual text if the img is the /sole/ content of the link.
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: On 5/28/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: On 5/27/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] I don't think this is a very natural use of the q element. A thumbnail isn't really like a quote of a prose fragment. Consider that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. True... but you don't have to have the q elements put quotes around the thumbnail. [snip] Hmm. I think Maciej does have a strong point about interoperability here. Removing the quotation punctuation with CSS does not help those with user-designated styles or UAs that ignore such CSS: e.g. text browsers and screen readers. The question to ask yourself is: if you could not remove the quotation punctuation and layout, would you still use q and blockquote? If a screen reader read (for example): A text browser can NOT see the graphical thumbnail anyways. It will see the alt text of the thumbnail. And putting the alt text in quotes seems OK with me. (It's only the putting the graphical thumbnail in quotes that seems wrong.) Ah. Okay, I hadn't understood that's what you were saying. I think putting the thumbnail alternative text in quotation punctuation is potentially problematic unless the alternative text is actually a quotation from the video's dialogue. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello Benjamin, On 5/28/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: On 5/28/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: On 5/27/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] I don't think this is a very natural use of the q element. A thumbnail isn't really like a quote of a prose fragment. Consider that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. True... but you don't have to have the q elements put quotes around the thumbnail. [snip] Hmm. I think Maciej does have a strong point about interoperability here. Removing the quotation punctuation with CSS does not help those with user-designated styles or UAs that ignore such CSS: e.g. text browsers and screen readers. The question to ask yourself is: if you could not remove the quotation punctuation and layout, would you still use q and blockquote? If a screen reader read (for example): A text browser can NOT see the graphical thumbnail anyways. It will see the alt text of the thumbnail. And putting the alt text in quotes seems OK with me. (It's only the putting the graphical thumbnail in quotes that seems wrong.) Ah. Okay, I hadn't understood that's what you were saying. I think putting the thumbnail alternative text in quotation punctuation is potentially problematic unless the alternative text is actually a quotation from the video's dialogue. What if there is no video dialogue? What if it is a motorcycle race? What should I put in there then?... an onomatopoeia of the motorcycles? Something like... alt=e..., e..., rrrmm... :-) Doesn't really seem useful. The Thumbnail of... suggestion seems better in that case. See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: Ah. Okay, I hadn't understood that's what you were saying. I think putting the thumbnail alternative text in quotation punctuation is potentially problematic unless the alternative text is actually a quotation from the video's dialogue. What if there is no video dialogue? Sorry, it's my fault for being oblique but that was actually my point. Not all videos have dialogue and not all dialogue would make the most suitable thumbnail alternative text. Hence q is not generally an appropriate element for enclosing the thumbnail. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello Benjamin, On 5/28/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: This is a tempting argument, but in theory and practice a problematic one. q and blockquote are not merely intended to be portions of a larger document but to be /quotations/: True... but is the abbr element designed for the way Microformats do dates? It seems like the same problem as that isn't it. And if we accept that screen readers can adapt to dates with the abbr element, then why not accept that they can adapt to thumbnails in a q element? But I /don't/ accept that. IMHO microformats currently abuse abbr and perhaps (more debatably) title for time and location, violating the standards-based credos of the movement with poor consequences for assistive technology which have already been widely discussed on the list. Admittantly, I haven't gotten around to reading those threads yet :-( Was there a consensus about a solution to the problem you are describing? And even if screen readers can eventually adapt to read ISO dates and geographical data as anything other than gibberish, their users will lag behind the times because mainstream screen readers are prohibitively expensive. On balance, I'd prefer innovators to depart from the HTML specification by introducing new attributes for new parsers with a custom DTD than to break HTML documents in existing user agents by abusing the semantics of old elements. (Not that a custom DTD would be a great idea either, just the lesser of two evils.) But at least the misuse of abbr for ISO time and location was useful for parsers, whereas this misuse (if we agree it is such) of q isn't. I'd say I'm suggesting it be used in a way the designers of it probably didn't imagine it would be used. (It doesn't seem to violate the HTML specification though.) Having said that... there isn't a thumbnail cite=... src=... element... so what else can we do? I want to add semantics somehow... but don't want to make non-validating HTML (and just make up a new element... even though I'd like to). I don't think quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote would be a human readable hint that it's a thumbnail from a video. Unless you happen to be a microformats guru. ;) What about what I mentioned above... about using alt text like... alt=Thumbnail of Dorothy encountering the Lion So that would read... quote Thumbnail of Dorothy encountering the Lion end quote Well that's an improvement. But in that case what's actually communicating the semantic is Thumbnail of, not q. And quote still confuses the issue. Also, I think Thumbnail of will prove harder to internationalize than Still: or Thumbnail:, which would mean parsers would struggle to get at the alternative text proper. The img alt attribute doesn't really seem built for i18n. Isn't i18n usually handled with completely different versions of the same HTML page. Which in that case would make the i18n for the sHTML Video Thumbnailing suggestion I made a non-issue. (I.e., there would be different version of the alt attribute for each language supported (in each of those pages)... and it will be a worded in a way that makes sense.) But yeah... having quote read out does still seem undesired. Aren't the aural style sheet or something that can be used to get rid of that? See ya Yeah... I'm actually using a captioning sHTML in a piece of software that hasn't been made public yet. (Perhaps I'll describe it on this list later... and get it reviewed.) Cool. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello Benjamin, Sorry for replying to my own post, but On 5/28/07, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Benjamin, On 5/28/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: This is a tempting argument, but in theory and practice a problematic one. q and blockquote are not merely intended to be portions of a larger document but to be /quotations/: True... but is the abbr element designed for the way Microformats do dates? It seems like the same problem as that isn't it. And if we accept that screen readers can adapt to dates with the abbr element, then why not accept that they can adapt to thumbnails in a q element? But I /don't/ accept that. IMHO microformats currently abuse abbr and perhaps (more debatably) title for time and location, violating the standards-based credos of the movement with poor consequences for assistive technology which have already been widely discussed on the list. Admittantly, I haven't gotten around to reading those threads yet :-( Was there a consensus about a solution to the problem you are describing? And even if screen readers can eventually adapt to read ISO dates and geographical data as anything other than gibberish, their users will lag behind the times because mainstream screen readers are prohibitively expensive. On balance, I'd prefer innovators to depart from the HTML specification by introducing new attributes for new parsers with a custom DTD than to break HTML documents in existing user agents by abusing the semantics of old elements. (Not that a custom DTD would be a great idea either, just the lesser of two evils.) But at least the misuse of abbr for ISO time and location was useful for parsers, whereas this misuse (if we agree it is such) of q isn't. I'd say I'm suggesting it be used in a way the designers of it probably didn't imagine it would be used. (It doesn't seem to violate the HTML specification though.) Having said that... there isn't a thumbnail cite=... src=... element... so what else can we do? I want to add semantics somehow... but don't want to make non-validating HTML (and just make up a new element... even though I'd like to). I don't think quote Dorothy encounters the Lion end quote would be a human readable hint that it's a thumbnail from a video. Unless you happen to be a microformats guru. ;) What about what I mentioned above... about using alt text like... alt=Thumbnail of Dorothy encountering the Lion So that would read... quote Thumbnail of Dorothy encountering the Lion end quote Well that's an improvement. But in that case what's actually communicating the semantic is Thumbnail of, not q. And quote still confuses the issue. Also, I think Thumbnail of will prove harder to internationalize than Still: or Thumbnail:, which would mean parsers would struggle to get at the alternative text proper. The img alt attribute doesn't really seem built for i18n. Isn't i18n usually handled with completely different versions of the same HTML page. Which in that case would make the i18n for the sHTML Video Thumbnailing suggestion I made a non-issue. (I.e., there would be different version of the alt attribute for each language supported (in each of those pages)... and it will be a worded in a way that makes sense.) But yeah... having quote read out does still seem undesired. Aren't the aural style sheet or something that can be used to get rid of that? Shouldn't putting quotes: none none on the q element be enough to get the screen readers to NOT say quote at the beginning and the end? As in... q style=quotes: none none;...q See ya See ya Yeah... I'm actually using a captioning sHTML in a piece of software that hasn't been made public yet. (Perhaps I'll describe it on this list later... and get it reviewed.) Cool. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
On 28 May 2007, at 22:09, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: But yeah... having quote read out does still seem undesired. Aren't the aural style sheet or something that can be used to get rid of that? Shouldn't putting quotes: none none on the q element be enough to get the screen readers to NOT say quote at the beginning and the end? As in... q style=quotes: none none;...q I think that noone has actually implemented aural CSS in any of the major screenreaders. Mind you, screenreaders don't generally read out quote for the q tag either. Have a look at this: http://dotjay.co.uk/tests/screen-readers/q-element/ For what it's worth, it seems reasonable to me that a still image, or short clip, could be marked up as a quote from a larger film. But the original HTML spec only considers quoting excerpts from written text, not excerpts from audio or video as well. I don't know if there's any practical value in using q like this, since q isn't consistently implemented across web browsers. Jim Jim O'Donnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://eatyourgreens.org.uk http://flickr.com/photos/eatyourgreens ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello James, On 5/28/07, James O'Donnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 28 May 2007, at 22:09, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: But yeah... having quote read out does still seem undesired. Aren't the aural style sheet or something that can be used to get rid of that? Shouldn't putting quotes: none none on the q element be enough to get the screen readers to NOT say quote at the beginning and the end? As in... q style=quotes: none none;...q I think that noone has actually implemented aural CSS in any of the major screenreaders. Mind you, screenreaders don't generally read out quote for the q tag either. Have a look at this: http://dotjay.co.uk/tests/screen-readers/q-element/ For what it's worth, it seems reasonable to me that a still image, or short clip, could be marked up as a quote from a larger film. But the original HTML spec only considers quoting excerpts from written text, not excerpts from audio or video as well. I don't know if there's any practical value in using q like this, since q isn't consistently implemented across web browsers. It's the cite attribute that gives it value. It lets me bind a set of thumbnails together (as being from the same video) while allowing the thumbnails to be all over the place (and not necessarily in some container element, like a span or something, which binds them together). (Did that make sense? Did I explain that well? Or would an example help?) See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: But I /don't/ accept that. IMHO microformats currently abuse abbr and perhaps (more debatably) title for time and location, violating the standards-based credos of the movement with poor consequences for assistive technology which have already been widely discussed on the list. Admittantly, I haven't gotten around to reading those threads yet :-( Was there a consensus about a solution to the problem you are describing? My understanding of the limited consensus would be that the community needs to do more accessibility testing of alternative solutions (e.g. using span with title instead of abbr with title), since: 1) It's more realistic to fix microformat parsers than upgrade everyone's assistive technology. 2) We need to make sure any fix actually has tangible benefits for end-users, rather than just looking better from a language lawyer point of view. I'd say I'm suggesting it be used in a way the designers of it probably didn't imagine it would be used. (It doesn't seem to violate the HTML specification though.) That entirely depends on what we think quotation means. The more I think about, the less convinced I am that quotation can stretch to mean thumbnail. Having said that... there isn't a thumbnail cite=... src=... element... so what else can we do? Use the cite element instead of the cite attribute. Or to put that in the form of a question: what problem does the cite attribute solve that the cite element does not? I want to add semantics somehow... but don't want to make non-validating HTML (and just make up a new element... even though I'd like to). Sure, but there's no point in adding the wrong semantics. ;) Also, I think Thumbnail of will prove harder to internationalize than Still: or Thumbnail:, which would mean parsers would struggle to get at the alternative text proper. The img alt attribute doesn't really seem built for i18n. Isn't i18n usually handled with completely different versions of the same HTML page. Which in that case would make the i18n for the sHTML Video Thumbnailing suggestion I made a non-issue. (I.e., there would be different version of the alt attribute for each language supported (in each of those pages)... and it will be a worded in a way that makes sense.) Sorry, I wasn't talking about about localizing individual documents and consuming them as a human reader. For that, any sensible phrasing is fine. The problem is with localizing the proposed microformat itself and consuming it as a microformat parser. I'm assuming such parsers may want to extract both the thumbnail and alternative text for the thumbnail. Now, prefixes such as Thumbnail of and Still: are only useful if you need to communicate that the thumbnail is in fact a thumbnail; that is, they are not part of the text alternative proper but additional hints to the user sneaked into the alt attribute. So a microformat parser will want to drop those phrases to get to the real alternative text, Dorothy encounters the Lion. But in order to drop them, it needs to be able to recognize them reliably. Separating the prefix from the real alt attribute with some very simple punctuation makes the task of writing a microformat parser that can deal with alt attributes in multiple languages much simpler. Instead of translating thumbnail of into every single language, you only need to translate the colon symbol into a comparatively small number of equivalents. It's the same reason we use a single ISO date format in microformats rather than hundreds of more human readable date formats, except in this case still: is human readable. :) But yeah... having quote read out does still seem undesired. Aren't the aural style sheet or something that can be used to get rid of that? Short answer: no, not with current technology. :( Only self-voicing software that has a tiny share in the assistive technology market (Emacspeak, Fire Vox, Opera for Windows) supports speech styles at all. Safari, Firefox, and Internet Explorer do not parse aural CSS and do not expose it to accessibility frameworks for use by screen readers; mainstream screen readers do not download the CSS and parse it for themselves; and only Orca (which barely counts as mainstream) uses CSS internally. If mainstream screen readers have access to quotation semantics /at all/, it's usually in the form of either: 1) Quotation punctuation already (e.g. Orca used with ELinks or Thunder used with WebbIE). 2) The abstract notion that a given node is a q or blockquote (e.g. Window-Eyes used with Firefox or JAWS used with Internet Explorer). What they do with this information varies enormously by screen reader, screen reader version, and configuration, but has nothing to do with author-specified CSS. For a bit more detail (mainly about how they handle the poor old q element) see:
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
James O'Donnell wrote: Mind you, screenreaders don't generally read out quote for the q tag either. Have a look at this: http://dotjay.co.uk/tests/screen-readers/q-element/ Well, in so far as they have any especially common behaviour for q, reading quote at the beginning is it. Of course, whether they do anything special for q depends on one's verbosity configuration, but then everything with a screen reader does. What skews everyone's view of q is that JAWS 7.1 (and probably 8 too, but I've never been able to find someone with a licenced copy to test that) doesn't recognize it as a quotation. But while JAWS is a very popular screen reader, it's not as dominant in the screen reader market as (say) Internet Explorer is in the browser world. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
It's the cite attribute that gives it value.
It lets me bind a set of thumbnails together (as being from the same
video) while allowing the thumbnails to be all over the place (and
not necessarily in some container element, like a span or something,
which binds them together).
(Did that make sense? Did I explain that well? Or would an example help?)
Ah, I see your problem. It's not pretty, but until HTML-next comes to
town how about either of the following hacky solutions:
1. Using cite then trying to hide it
span class=video-stillimg
src=http://www.example.com/thumbnail.jpg; alt=Still: Dorothy
encounters the Lionspan class=full-video(cite
class=full-video(a href=http://www.example.com/video;Wizard of
Oz/a/cite)/span
with CSS:
@media all {
.full-video {display:none;speak:none;height:0;visibility:hidden;width:0}
}
If the citation is not hidden, it's not the end of the world: it still
makes sense. Thanks to buggy treatment of display:none, I think
mainstream screen readers will fail to read it even though they ignore
speak:none.
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=ScreenreaderVisibility
http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_support/BulletinView.cfm?QC=1165
2. Using object
object class=video-still type=image/jpeg
data=http://www.example.com/thumbnail.jpg;
param name=full-video value=http://www.example.com/video;
valuetype=ref/param
Still: Dorothy encounters the Lion.
/object
Both would need some testing though.
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello, This is an RFC -- Request for Comments. So I'm looking for people's opinions, comments, and criticisms on all this. Note... this is NOT a Microformat. Nor an attempt to define a new Microformat. This is about semantic HTML (sHTML) markup. (Hopefully this isn't too off-topic for this mailing list. I'm just looking to tap this group for comments on this.) BACKGROUND I'm developing some software for a client that will (among other things) display video thumbnails within HTML. I've actually used this form of semantic HTML before. However, until this, none of it was publicly released. (Also, with this software, once it is out there, I won't be in control of the software... and thus not able to make corrections to the markup later.) SEMANTIC HTML The way I'm planning on marking these up is using a combination of 2 built in HTML elements. The q element and the img element. Conceptually, I'm considering a video thumbnail to be analogous to quoted text. In other words, I'm conceptually considering video thumbnails to be a quote of a video. So, for example, we would have something like... q cite=http://example.com/video;img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; //q Or if you want that pretty-printed... q cite=http://example.com/thevideo; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; / /q CITING VIDEO In this, I make use of the q element's cite attribute to refer to the video where the thumbnail is taken from. This cite attribute might refer to a binary video file. But could also refer to a blog post or vlog post in which the video is embedded. For the purposes of this, I'm considering some (but not all) HTML pages to be video. So.. for example, an HTML vlog post is considered to be video. TYPES OF THUMBNAILS Really there are different sources a thumbnail can come from. A thumbnail can come from a video. But it could also come from a (static) image. So... to distinguish between these different types of thumbnails, I've added a class-video to the q element. (I suppose if you have a thumbnail from a static image you could add class-image... but anyways) So, our example from before becomes... q class=video cite=http://example.com/video;img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; //q Or if you want that pretty-printed... q class=video cite=http://example.com/thevideo; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; / /q RFC Comments? Critisizms? Opinions? -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
On May 27, 2007, at 11:10 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: TYPES OF THUMBNAILS Really there are different sources a thumbnail can come from. A thumbnail can come from a video. But it could also come from a (static) image. So... to distinguish between these different types of thumbnails, I've added a class-video to the q element. (I suppose if you have a thumbnail from a static image you could add class-image... but anyways) So, our example from before becomes... q class=video cite=http://example.com/video;img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; //q Or if you want that pretty-printed... q class=video cite=http://example.com/thevideo; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; / /q RFC Comments? Critisizms? Opinions? I don't think this is a very natural use of the q element. A thumbnail isn't really like a quote of a prose fragment. Consider that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. Also, q cite= does not generally result in a clickable hyperlink, and q adds rendered quotes in some browsers but not others. If you want the full video to be clickable, what you might want is: a rev=thumbnail href=http://example.com/video; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; /a Or, since rev is confusing and semi-deprecated, you could use rel=full-video or something like that; there's no very good opposite to thumbnail unfortunately. Regards, Maciej ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Hello Maciej, On 5/27/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 27, 2007, at 11:10 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: TYPES OF THUMBNAILS Really there are different sources a thumbnail can come from. A thumbnail can come from a video. But it could also come from a (static) image. So... to distinguish between these different types of thumbnails, I've added a class-video to the q element. (I suppose if you have a thumbnail from a static image you could add class-image... but anyways) So, our example from before becomes... q class=video cite=http://example.com/video;img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; //q Or if you want that pretty-printed... q class=video cite=http://example.com/thevideo; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; / /q RFC Comments? Critisizms? Opinions? I don't think this is a very natural use of the q element. A thumbnail isn't really like a quote of a prose fragment. Consider that you would never put a thumbnail in quotation marks. True... but you don't have to have the q elements put quotes around the thumbnail. Please refer to the following to see how to get rid of it... http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2007-May/009703.html This is similar to the problem we have with using abbr for dates. Some browsers put a border under the abbr element. We get rid of the bottom border some browser put under the abbr element (when we use it for dates) with a little extra inline style. We can do something similar here for the q element used for video thumbnails. Also, q cite= does not generally result in a clickable hyperlink, It's not suppose to be clickable (in general). In this bit of sHTML, I'm only tackling the problem of video thumbnailing. It is true that I often do make it clickable by having code like the following... a href=http://example.com/thevideo; q class=video cite=http://example.com/thevideo; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; alt=... / /q /a But this is NOT always the case. Sometimes I don't want the thumbnail to be clickable. and q adds rendered quotes in some browsers but not others. If you want the full video to be clickable, what you might want is: a rev=thumbnail href=http://example.com/video; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; /a I'm not sure if the rev attribute is being used correctly in your markup. Or, since rev is confusing and semi-deprecated, you could use rel=full-video or something like that; there's no very good opposite to thumbnail unfortunately. Regards, Maciej See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: a rev=thumbnail href=http://example.com/video; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; /a I'm not sure if the rev attribute is being used correctly in your markup. Rev defines the reverse link to the current document, not to whatever is encapsulated by the link itself...unless I'm reading the spec wrong This attribute describes the relationship from the current document to the anchor specified by the href attribute http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#edef-A So, the above would mean the current document as a whole is the thumbnail for http://example.com/video; rather than the img is the thumbnail for So yes, it's a slight misuse (or a case of stretching the semantics, if you will) of rev, I'd say. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ __ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RFC: sHTML Video Thumbnailing
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#h-12.1.2 My simplified understanding of the relationship between rel and rev is With the rel attribute, the relationship that the linked page has to this link is foo. With the rev attribute, the relationship that this link has from the linked page is foo. Use previous or next as the link values and you'll understand what's going on. From: Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: a rev=thumbnail href=http://example.com/video; img src=http://example.com/thumbnail.jpg; /a I'm not sure if the rev attribute is being used correctly in your markup. Rev defines the reverse link to the current document, not to whatever is encapsulated by the link itself...unless I'm reading the spec wrong This attribute describes the relationship from the current document to the anchor specified by the href attribute http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#edef-A A rel link from the video page to the thumbnail would be thumbnail. So, a rev link on the thumbnail to the video page would also be thumbnail. I've got no problem with using rel and rev values myself, but if you're going to use a a custom link-type that's not actually defined in http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-links then you should use a profile to define what's going on. -- Paul Wilkins ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
