Thread Subject: Re: "closed software"

Note

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: Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
Date: Wed, Dec 27 2006 1:55 PM

Since I earlier offered a different perspective on "closed software", I
thought I would respond to each item.

1. Security reasons: Security should be a part of a requirement in the
same way accessibility should be a part of the requirement for a
product. First, security options _CAN_ be accessible (e.g., accessible
CAPTCHAs or accessible login screens). Second, where there is a
technical determination that no access to application programming
interfaces (APIs) that work with assistive technology is allowed, there
is a business justification. No matter what assistive technology can do,
if the system designed to block user interaction to only one type of
system interface for business reasons, that is an exception. However,
I'd be amiss if I didn't say see "First".

2. Besides semantics, and debating among friends, software can't run
without an operating system unless it, itself, IS the operating system.

3. What is the point of making a classification of "CLOSED SOFTWARE"?
What does it mean to us in context of Section 508? Your example is one
of being accessible through design. I'd say the example doesn't help the
argument and problem we are trying to solve (if you'll please forgive
me). We are concerned when software doesn't work with assistive
technology and isn't designed to be accessible. I'd also say I have the
expectation that this software is generally only used in conjunction
with specialized hardware. Firefox web browser was considered to be too
small a market for certain AT vendors. What does that mean? I think they
have an API. I think this is complex interaction of _accessibility
interfaces_ dependent on the operating system. Sorry, I'm an
Amiga/Windows/OSX/Linux user and it varies considerably. It is too easy
to just think in context of one platform, especially when embedded
operating systems in phones are so plentiful and experiencing these same
issues. Sorry to ramble, I think I need to discuss this some more.

4. Platform software issues are interesting. Is commercial availability
exemptions? Tying it to vendor product and 'official' support is
dangerous too; I'm sure my MS Windows vendor doesn't support me running
Linux on my corporate desktop, but the screen reader and web browser
works just fine for most of my needs. I think that is close to the
earlier iPod firmware upgrade. But who cares? Even if a 3rd party or
Apple made the software as an add-on to the product it can be made
accessible. The debate so far has focused on the vendor not developing
assistive technology. Third parties do and you can make things
accessible without assistive technology.

Sorry to disagree, but the closed software approach doesn't work well
for Section 508 evaluation. I can't help but feel we're not asking the
right questions. DRM is bad for end-users, security typically negatively
impacts end-user experience, and accessibility is all about the user!
This discussion is really useful for questioning vendors and how they
support our business/agency. I don't think finding justification for
closed software means we should place a label on software and treat it
any differently from any other software. Closed software should be
accessible and follow the same technical standards as any other
software.

Regards,


Norman B. Robinson
Section 508 Coordinator
IT Governance, US Postal Service
phone: 202.268.8246


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg
Vanderheiden
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 12:45 PM
To: 'TEITAC self contained/closed products subcommittee'; 'TEITAC
Web/Software Subcommittee'
Cc: 'TEITAC General Interface Accessibility Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-closed] "closed software"


Some possible examples of closed software.

Maybe some things like: (numbered only to facilitate discussion)

1 - Software that for security reasons does not allow anything to access
what it has on screen and which reads keyboard registers directly to
avoid
tampering or 'remote' typing.

2 - Software designed to run on a product without and operating system.

3 - Software that has no API for AT - but instead has built in
accessibility
since there is no AT vendor who will work with and support the unique
capability of the software because the market is too small for AT
vendors.

4 - Something like Randy pointed to (see just below). The hardware is
not
closed since new software can be loaded. But the platform/software is
closed.

Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University