Thread Subject: Re: "closed software"
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Debbie Cook
Date: Tue, Dec 19 2006 11:15 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Lybarger, Barbara (MOD): "Re: "closed software""
- Previous message in thread: Jim Tobias: ""closed software""
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
The most obvious example is probably software protected by DRM.
I think there are also products where the "closed" aspect is hard to
determine in terms of origin. A non-federal procurement example: last week I
flew on Alaska Air. They distributed, for a fee, something called a Didgie
Player. I don't know who makes it. Entertainment including movies and music.
No captioning. No accessible menu. No way to attach AT, but I don't think
there is any AT to augment the physical controls or to make it accessible
non-visually. It has hardware and software issues I suspect. You could make
the hardware more accessible by providing readily identifiable controls and
you could add some kind of ports to allow various AT on board, but the
software is at the heart of the problem along with the lack of existingAT.
So, for me, this product is closed and it doesn't matter whether or not it's
hardware or software. The solution for someone with dexterity limitations
would be addition of hardware connectors for AT. The solution for a blind or
deaf person would be software based.
I don't think it will be meaningful for this type of developer to have to
run all over the standards to figure out what to do. So, I still think
there's a category of closed products where both the hardware and software
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Tobias" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "'TEITAC self contained/closed products subcommittee'"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; "'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 4:55 AM
Subject: [teitac-websoftware] "closed software"
In the discussion of closed products, we seem to be converging on the
opinion that "closed" is a characteristic, not a category. In this context,
software has been mentioned as potentially closed. Can someone please give
me an example, or a further explanation, of what closed software might be?
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =