CIW:Community Portal: Difference between revisions
From Comprehensible Input Wiki
Latest comment: 5 days ago by Dimpizzy in topic Add more classification properties
Content added Content deleted
No edit summary |
(→Add more classification properties: Reply) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<div id="portal-header">This page is for any and all discussions related to Comprehensible Input Wiki, including questions, feedback, and suggestions. To contact the administrator directly, you can add a message on [[User talk:Dimpizzy]] or email <code>dimpizzy@comprehensibleinputwiki.com</code>.<br><br> |
<div id="portal-header">This page is for any and all discussions related to Comprehensible Input Wiki, including questions, feedback, and suggestions. To contact the administrator directly, you can add a message on [[User talk:Dimpizzy]] or email <code>dimpizzy@comprehensibleinputwiki.com</code>.<br><br> |
||
<center>[[Special:NewSection/CIW:Community Portal|<span class="mw-ui-button mw-ui-progressive mw-ui-small">Add a new topic</span>]]</center> |
<center>[[Special:NewSection/CIW:Community Portal|<span class="mw-ui-button mw-ui-progressive mw-ui-small">Add a new topic</span>]]</center> |
||
== Add more classification properties == |
|||
Thank you @[[User:Dimpizzy|Dimpizzy]] for developing this Wiki! I have an idea regarding the classification of audiovisual materials. |
|||
The accessibility of audiovisual content depends on many factors which cannot be reduced to one-dimensional classes of "difficulty levels". While there exist approaches to grade written texts as such, audiovisual materials have additional important properties such as speech tempo, audio clarity and learning aids such as high-quality captions. |
|||
As the first of those potential additional properties, I propose adding an ordinal metric for the quality of target-language verbatim captions/subtitles: |
|||
* 0 (non-existent or very limited) |
|||
** No captions provided of any sort (whether closed or open [burned in], machine-generated or submitted as a manual draft), or |
|||
** The captions are only partially complete, or |
|||
** The captions diverge very much from being verbatim. This is quite common for e.g. Arabic-language movies which mostly have everything captioned in Modern Standard Arabic despite the work comprising largely colloquial speech. |
|||
* 1 (limited) |
|||
** The captions are complete. |
|||
** There are semi-frequent word errors or typos, or |
|||
** The captions diverge somewhat from being verbatim. This is quite common for e.g. Arabic-language documentaries which mostly have everything, including interview segments in colloquial speech, captioned in Modern Standard Arabic. |
|||
* 2 (sound) |
|||
** The captions are complete and there are minimal word errors. There are no noticeable lapses in timing. |
|||
** There may still be room for improvement in terms of captions formatting — punctuation, locations of caption group breaks, etc. |
|||
What do you think? [[User:Y. Dongchen|Y. Dongchen]] ([[User talk:Y. Dongchen|talk]]) 03:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Hey, I think that's a good idea. Maybe there could be a template to add a 0, 1, or 2 icon styled to show it's about captions next to the link, similarly to the video, audio, or text icons. Or if you have a better idea, I'm all ears. [[User:Dimpizzy|Dimpizzy]] ([[User talk:Dimpizzy|talk]]) 21:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 21:02, 22 June 2024
This page is for any and all discussions related to Comprehensible Input Wiki, including questions, feedback, and suggestions. To contact the administrator directly, you can add a message on User talk:Dimpizzy or email
dimpizzy@comprehensibleinputwiki.com.Add more classification properties[edit | edit source]
Thank you @Dimpizzy for developing this Wiki! I have an idea regarding the classification of audiovisual materials.
The accessibility of audiovisual content depends on many factors which cannot be reduced to one-dimensional classes of "difficulty levels". While there exist approaches to grade written texts as such, audiovisual materials have additional important properties such as speech tempo, audio clarity and learning aids such as high-quality captions.
As the first of those potential additional properties, I propose adding an ordinal metric for the quality of target-language verbatim captions/subtitles:
- 0 (non-existent or very limited)
- No captions provided of any sort (whether closed or open [burned in], machine-generated or submitted as a manual draft), or
- The captions are only partially complete, or
- The captions diverge very much from being verbatim. This is quite common for e.g. Arabic-language movies which mostly have everything captioned in Modern Standard Arabic despite the work comprising largely colloquial speech.
- 1 (limited)
- The captions are complete.
- There are semi-frequent word errors or typos, or
- The captions diverge somewhat from being verbatim. This is quite common for e.g. Arabic-language documentaries which mostly have everything, including interview segments in colloquial speech, captioned in Modern Standard Arabic.
- 2 (sound)
- The captions are complete and there are minimal word errors. There are no noticeable lapses in timing.
- There may still be room for improvement in terms of captions formatting — punctuation, locations of caption group breaks, etc.
What do you think? Y. Dongchen (talk) 03:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hey, I think that's a good idea. Maybe there could be a template to add a 0, 1, or 2 icon styled to show it's about captions next to the link, similarly to the video, audio, or text icons. Or if you have a better idea, I'm all ears. Dimpizzy (talk) 21:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
