This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
For more details please see: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Media_Accessibility_Checklist#ca (a current work effort of the media sub-team of the Accessibility Task Force)
Please don't link to long documents in the bugs, just describe the problem. That notwithstanding, though, I really have no idea what this request is intended for. Do you mean that HTML should have an API to perform audio analysis and background muting? Or is this a request for a user agent requirement of some kind? I'm not clear at all what is being requested here. What is the HTML feature that I can add to address this bug? EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Did Not Understand Request Change Description: no spec change Rationale: I don't understand. Could you elaborate?
Why is this a spec or Web content problem instead of being a browser-side DSP problem? At least my TV can do some DSP tricks that amplify voice frequencies without the TV signal or the content having to do anything to isolate voice data from other audio data.
** This has been identified as a probable issue within HTML5 by the media sub-team of the Accessibility Task Force. The bug has been filed at this time to meet the October 1st cutoff date, with more details forth coming. **
Please reassign the bug to me once you have provided the information. Thanks.
NEEDSINFO is the correct state for a bug "with more details forth coming". Please do not REOPEN until sufficient information is present for the bug to be evaluated.
Why does this bug have the TrackerRequest keyword? Seems out of order to me.
Removing TrackerRequest, since all parties acknowledge that this bug is missing info and there is a stated intent to add the required information. It would probably be unhelpful to escalate this bug to the issue tracker while that information is still being gathered.
The bug triage sub-team adding the a11yTF keyword; John could you please follow-up?
Bug triage sub-team assigning to John Foliot to provide needed info.
UAAG20 had this at one time, then removed it as it was technically too difficult.