Transcript for video content does not need to be visible (ee13b5, 1a02b0)

[kengdoj]

Per https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/3642: SC 1.2.1 does not require alternative for time-based media for video-only to be visible.

Remove "visible" from Expectation of these rules:

• Video element visual-only content has transcript (ee13b5)

• Audio and visuals of video element have transcript (1a02b0)

From ACT TF May 2 discussion -

1. Removing "visible", the Expectation would be

The visual information of each test target is available through a text transcript that is included in the accessibility tree, and is either on the page or linked.

2. Pass Examples should include visible transcript on page, non-visible transcript on page, linked transcript.
3. Failed examples should include visible transcript not included in accessibility tree, and SC 1.3.1 should be a secondary requirement.

[giacomo-petri]

Hi @kengdoj,

I'm proceeding with these adjustments. To clarify, is the purpose of 1.3.1 as a secondary requirement to establish a programmatic connection between the video and the transcription, ensuring users can easily discern the correlation between the two? Or just to communicate that information presented visually are not equally communicated to all users in case of transcription non-included in the acc tree? In the meantime I proceed for the latter.

Thank you.

[kengdoj]

Hi @giacomo-petri ,

Yes, the latter.

Failed examples should include visible transcript not included in accessibility tree, and SC 1.3.1 should be a secondary requirement.

Sorry the above wasn't clear. Failed examples should include one that has a transcript that is not in the accessibility tree (which fails the rule and 1.2.1) and is visible. SC 1.3.1 would be a secondary requirement (scenario 3).

[giacomo-petri]

Hi @kengdoj,

Thanks for the explanation. I believe my PR already covers this. Would you mind taking a look when you get a chance?

[giacomo-petri]

Hi @kengdoj,

as pointed out by @Jym77 in https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2187#discussion_r1611377334, "Failed examples should include visible transcript not included in accessibility tree, and SC 1.3.1 should be a secondary requirement." conflicts with #2064

Are you ok with removing it?

[kengdoj]

I think it's getting more complicated because there were 2 decisions that affect the transcript video rules:

• Remove "visible" from Transcript video rules Expectations (https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2187)
• Remove "included in accessibility tree" from Transcript rules Expectations (https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2064)

Rule 1a02b0 is in both PRs. It may be best to wait for #2064 to be merged.

In May 2nd Task Force meeting, we concluded that after making the above changes, the Expectations would be something like - text transcript is either on the page or linked.

And, passed test cases have transcripts that are visible, non-visible or linked.

• We also thought it would be good to include a visible transcript that is not in the accessibility tree example passes the rule. Add SC 1.3.1 as a secondary requirement because it only applies to visible transcripts.

[giacomo-petri]

@kengdoj,

since #2064 was closed without being merged, should we proceed with this issue and request reviewers for the related PR (removing the "on hold" label)?

[Jym77]

Closed by #2187