Update audio-description.html

[mbgower]

Change to informative content (a note) in normative content (definition):

Added the word "important" to note 3 to match the wording of the definition of audio description (which reads "..to describe important visual details...").

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for wcag2 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	dde127b
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/wcag2/deploys/68092ff7729592000834b615
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-4323--wcag2.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[bruce-usab]

All of the information >> than important information. I prefer the important qualifier.

But what is “video information”? Is it the same as information conveyed by the video?

I think maybe the sentence could be:

Where all of the important information is already provided in existing audio, no additional audio description is necessary.

[bruce-usab]

Important qualifier is important and good. But please consider deleting “video”.

Where all of the important information is already provided in existing audio, no additional audio description is necessary.

[patrickhlauke]

I'd actually suggest changing the "video information" (which is existing wording, not something this PR adds) to "visual information", which is what this is getting at, I think

[bruce-usab]

Discussed on backlog call 4/15. As Patrick notes, “video information” features in Note 3 of AD definition so that must be okay!

[patrickhlauke]

I had more thorough look, and unfortunately I think we may have to stick with <a>video</a> here ... as that is what the normative SCs and various other terms use - confusingly, to refer to the visuals in synchronised media in general (where i'd argue in more common parlance when somebody talks about "video" they refer to the whole thing, a video file like an mp4, which has visuals and audio), and we'd need to start fundamentally changing quite a few normative bits.

wondering if instead we need some sort of note somewhere (maybe even just added to the term definition for "video" https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-video) that explains something along the lines of "when we talk about video, we don't necessarily mean the technology/container format ... a CSS/SVG/Canvas animation that provides visual information can be classed as 'video' - the term refers to any visual aspect of synchronised media")

[mbgower]

Thanks for having a look, @patrickhlauke.

There are so many things it would be nice to clean up in Time-based media. At one point, some of us talked about releasing an update to WCAG 2 that attempted to address a bunch of the normative language. If that were ever to happen, there is no shortage of material here!

But I agree that a note added to the normative term might be a way of providing some clarity without normatively altering anything. Feel free to whip something up :)