An audio described version is useful only if the intended viewer can find and select it. Once the production approach is agreed, specify how the website presents that choice. A file tucked into an internal delivery folder is not a completed audience route.
W3C's description guidance distinguishes integrated description, alternative videos and separate files that require player support. The publishing arrangement must match the method actually commissioned. Do not assume that attaching any description-related asset creates a working control.
Name the option accurately
Use wording that tells the visitor what the version provides. An unexplained icon or a generic “alternative” link may not communicate the purpose. Have the responsible reviewer check the label in the context of the page and with the input methods included in the evaluation scope.
Identify whether the option changes an audio track within the current player or opens a separate video. The distinction affects the viewer's position, captions and return route. Ask the supplier to demonstrate the real operation rather than describing both approaches as a simple toggle.
Keep the ordinary and described versions clearly associated with the same project and approved account. Their titles can identify the shared film while stating the difference. The visitor should not have to compare unrelated filenames to decide whether they have found the correct resource.
Decide what switching should do
If the described version has a different duration, moving to the same numerical timestamp may not reach the corresponding moment. Ask production to identify any structural difference and have the website team propose an appropriate switching rule. Restarting with a clear explanation may be more dependable than an inaccurate automatic match.
Where the versions share a timeline and the player promises position-preserving selection, test it at several meaningful points. Confirm that the chosen audio is heard, the state is identified and the viewer can reverse the choice. A changed menu label alone does not prove the intended content is playing.
Check any companion captions or transcript after selection. The organisation should know which assets belong with each viewing route. The right pairing may depend on the commissioned description method, so ask the relevant specialist rather than assigning one text track to every option by default.
A hypothetical separate version
Imagine a builder commissions a described project film that includes additional pauses for visual explanation. Its website offers a button that switches versions while retaining the same timestamp. Halfway through, the switch lands at a different subject because the durations no longer align.
The buyer asks for a deliberate route suitable for the two timelines. The team may provide clearly named separate versions with an understandable restart, or commission a supported mapping if that feature is justified. The decision concerns reliable selection, not changing the description merely to simplify the website.
Accept the route with its intended users
Have the agreed reviewer locate the option from the page's ordinary entry point and complete a viewing task. Record the player, version and switching behaviour that were assessed. This creates useful evidence without turning one successful test into a broad compliance claim.
Discuss the film and description requirements with Live Images. Confirm suitability, production scope and any specialist involvement, while assigning selection controls and deployed-player verification to the appropriate website team.
Prepared with AI assistance for Live Images. Planning guidance is general; suitability and production scope must be agreed for your project.