RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
Betsie's days are no doubt numbered - modern coding techniques allow much greater accessibility to be built into webpages, allowing accessibility without having to resort to parsers like Betsie. You can do a huge amount with a sensible HTML structure and CSS layout/presenation techniques. I assume that y'all have read the code (of BETSIE)? Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
At 14:04 + 9/11/05, Andrew Bowden wrote: Betsie is a bull in a sledgehammer/nut approach to accessibility from a time when that was the only way to crack the nut. Now, someone has invented the nutcracker. Of course not everyone yet has a nutcracker so we still need the sledgehammer, but it's role is increasing. What Betsie does - specifically its rearranging of navigation to be at the bottom - was necessary for the time, but that rearrangement can be done within the HTML very easily (that's how I build my own webpages - so when you turn off CSS, content at the top, navigation at the bottom). Conversion of colours etc, is even easier with CSS. These things can be automatically built into a page without needing standalone parsers. All true... http://sourceforge.net/projects/betsie Better close that down first then? Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
Thanks for the screenshots James. So unless they just ripped the graphics from WMP (possible but unlikely) it's using that as an embedded client. It could be worth trying some of the standard WM player keyboard shortcuts, eg F9/F10 for volume, ALT+ENTER for full screen, and see if it intercepts them. The skin might need to be specifically coded to hand those events to the player. I suppose the questions are - what's the broadcast stream format (is it WMV or some more globally viewable content like MP4). And is it DRM protected, which would definitely prevent Mac** or Linux users, or any other OS, from viewing the content. Cheers - Neil ** Well, Mac media player supports early v4 DRM but they're up to v7 now and that's completely broken on the Mac WMP - and not looking to be updated by all appearances. Unless the beeb can apply some leverage wink / At 00:38 08/11/2005, you wrote: Here's a few screenies: http://www.webcoding.co.uk/imp/ Note that you can actually play the DRM'd files in Media Player itself, it doesnt have to go through the iMP player design. All the video's can be fast forwarded etc without issue. Jim. Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media] wrote: At 12:01 07/11/2005, you wrote: Since it's a testing beta more aimed at testing the technology and the idea I'm sure the accessibility elements will come in when it's out. The boards suggest a limited budget to examine this idea and that's why we havent seen a linux or mac client and I suspect the same can be applied to a complete design and other related issues. I missed getting on the Beta due to being out of the country. But my impression was it uses a skinned windows media player. I could be wrong. If I'm not though, any inherent limitations of WMP (broken, mostly on Mac, and not available for unixes) would be present. Thoughts ? Cheers - Neil - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/ Why is there no text only link on this page? There is on most pages on bbc.co.uk... Feel free to use this! http://www.recursion.co.uk/cgi-bin/betsie.cgi/www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/ No charge! Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, James wrote: Here's a few screenies: http://www.webcoding.co.uk/imp/ Note that you can actually play the DRM'd files in Media Player itself, it doesnt have to go through the iMP player design. All the video's can be fast forwarded etc without issue. With all this DRMed fun, I assume that something stops folk from just screen capturing the rendered output and turning it back into an un-DRMed MPEG2 stream? I'm not a windows user, but a quick Google threw up URL:http://www.hmelyoff.com/index.php?section=4 as a possible tool to let you do this; I'm sure there are others (I know years ago my old SGI Indy workstation with the CosmoCompress video capture card let me grab movies from random sections of the screen, so this is nothing new). Jim'll - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/ Why is there no text only link on this page? There is on most pages on bbc.co.uk... Probably because it has accessibility features built into the page itself, which allow the presentation in a similar way to what Betsie provides, and in some aspects, beyond. Just my educated guess - not sure if anyone who built that site is on this list, to say for sure. Feel free to use this! http://www.recursion.co.uk/cgi-bin/betsie.cgi/www.bbc.co.uk/accessibilit y/ Of course the BBC's Betsie can still be used http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/education/betsie/parser.pl/www.bbc.co.uk/ac cessibility Betsie's days are no doubt numbered - modern coding techniques allow much greater accessibility to be built into webpages, allowing accessibility without having to resort to parsers like Betsie. You can do a huge amount with a sensible HTML structure and CSS layout/presenation techniques. Andrew http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
Because it's written entirely in standards compliant code, with CSS, so can be rendered using a user-applied stylesheet, I think? I've heard - and this is just on the internal bush telegraph, nothing official, that betsie is slowly being phased out in favour of fully accessible coding of pages. I think it's getting a bit long in the tooth and there are load issues, but I could be wrong. K -Original Message- From: Gordon Joly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 08 November 2005 10:08 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Cc: Kim Plowright; Jonathan Chetwynd Subject: RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad? http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/ Why is there no text only link on this page? There is on most pages on bbc.co.uk... Feel free to use this! http://www.recursion.co.uk/cgi-bin/betsie.cgi/www.bbc.co.uk/accessibilit y/ No charge! Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
I don't know about exactly how they've taken accessibility into account on iMP - maybe take the question to the message board posted here earlier? I'll ask Priya on your behalf if I see her around, though. I can't imagine for a second it's been ignored, but I suppose there's a possibility that they haven't completed all the work on it in the beta? Here's some official-ly stuff about what we do: Re accessibility in general, we do have best practice in place: http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/bbc/standards.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/newmedia/accessibility/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/ We also work with AbilityNet on accessibility; they also run *amazing* training courses for us, which all producers and coders in our department went to; it's humbling watching someone surf your site with a screenreader, certainly. http://www.abilitynet.org.uk/ From my point of view - accessibility is always something I take in to account; it makes sites/products more accessible to *everyone*, not just those who use alternative access methods. Great believer in common sense, me... k -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Chetwynd Sent: 05 November 2005 08:58 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad? iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad? Does anyone have links to positive reports on the accessibility of iMP? According to: http://cms.elfden.co.uk/2005/10/18/bbc-imp-trial-part-1/ Accessibility wise it stinks. No keyboard access what so ever. Who is responsible for accessibility at iMP and which groups representing people with disabilities were invited to comment? Could this be an integral part of the BBC's regular best practice? cheers! Jonathan Chetwynd Accessibility Consultant on Learning Disabilities and the Internet 29 Crimsworth Road SW8 4RJ 020 7978 1764 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
Since it's a testing beta more aimed at testing the technology and the idea I'm sure the accessibility elements will come in when it's out. The boards suggest a limited budget to examine this idea and that's why we havent seen a linux or mac client and I suspect the same can be applied to a complete design and other related issues. Kim Plowright wrote: I don't know about exactly how they've taken accessibility into account on iMP - maybe take the question to the message board posted here earlier? I'll ask Priya on your behalf if I see her around, though. I can't imagine for a second it's been ignored, but I suppose there's a possibility that they haven't completed all the work on it in the beta? Here's some official-ly stuff about what we do: Re accessibility in general, we do have best practice in place: http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/bbc/standards.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/newmedia/accessibility/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/ We also work with AbilityNet on accessibility; they also run *amazing* training courses for us, which all producers and coders in our department went to; it's humbling watching someone surf your site with a screenreader, certainly. http://www.abilitynet.org.uk/ From my point of view - accessibility is always something I take in to account; it makes sites/products more accessible to *everyone*, not just those who use alternative access methods. Great believer in common sense, me... k -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Chetwynd Sent: 05 November 2005 08:58 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad? iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad? Does anyone have links to positive reports on the accessibility of iMP? According to: http://cms.elfden.co.uk/2005/10/18/bbc-imp-trial-part-1/ Accessibility wise it stinks. No keyboard access what so ever. Who is responsible for accessibility at iMP and which groups representing people with disabilities were invited to comment? Could this be an integral part of the BBC's regular best practice? cheers! Jonathan Chetwynd Accessibility Consultant on Learning Disabilities and the Internet 29 Crimsworth Road SW8 4RJ 020 7978 1764 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
I can see it now - a site for appraising weather forecasts: IsItHotOrNot.com On 11/7/05, Mark Simpkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about a 'Rate this weather' option? Just grade how accurate you thought the weather forcast was for your area. Mark. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Murray Walker Sent: 07 November 2005 13:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad? -Original Message- From: Gordon Joly (Ignore that fact that temperatures forecast may differ by as much as 5 degrees C:-) Reminds me of an old idea... Weather from Yahoo, BBC, Met Office all regularly seem to differ quite widely, based purely on personal subjective checking. So... * Poll sites on a regular basis and log, * add after the fact data on what it actually turned out to be * build stats on accuracy obviously hard to do nationally, but I keep meaning to do it for my local area. And/or build a site that allows people to log actual results for their area. Thinking about it, with all the physical weather stations, it ought to be possible to automate even that part (logging actual measured weather, vs 5 day forecast) Maybe someone already has... either way, all seems rather strange given that I assume all the data comes from the met office originally. Or maybe yahoo get it from weather.com or some such... Anyway ... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
Mark Simpkins wrote: How about a 'Rate this weather' option? Just grade how accurate you thought the weather forcast was for your area. Isithotornot.com? Oh really, I should go on tour :) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
At 12:01 07/11/2005, you wrote: Since it's a testing beta more aimed at testing the technology and the idea I'm sure the accessibility elements will come in when it's out. The boards suggest a limited budget to examine this idea and that's why we havent seen a linux or mac client and I suspect the same can be applied to a complete design and other related issues. I missed getting on the Beta due to being out of the country. But my impression was it uses a skinned windows media player. I could be wrong. If I'm not though, any inherent limitations of WMP (broken, mostly on Mac, and not available for unixes) would be present. Thoughts ? Cheers - Neil - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] iMP: accessibility, is the smell really that bad?
Here's a few screenies: http://www.webcoding.co.uk/imp/ Note that you can actually play the DRM'd files in Media Player itself, it doesnt have to go through the iMP player design. All the video's can be fast forwarded etc without issue. Jim. Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media] wrote: At 12:01 07/11/2005, you wrote: Since it's a testing beta more aimed at testing the technology and the idea I'm sure the accessibility elements will come in when it's out. The boards suggest a limited budget to examine this idea and that's why we havent seen a linux or mac client and I suspect the same can be applied to a complete design and other related issues. I missed getting on the Beta due to being out of the country. But my impression was it uses a skinned windows media player. I could be wrong. If I'm not though, any inherent limitations of WMP (broken, mostly on Mac, and not available for unixes) would be present. Thoughts ? Cheers - Neil - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
