Thread Subject: Re: "Supportedby AT"

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: Thu, Jan 04 2007 3:50 PM

Gregg,

You are missing another option. Well allow technology to be used
that supports the largest audience possible through the use of a
standards approach.

The role of standards is to make critical mass out of technologies
to allow everyone to participate. Our USPS policy includes the
requirement for internal formats to be allowed that aren't allowed
publicly, simply because we can accommodate the end-user internally.
This is your "scenario 2". But we aren't going to purchase
WizzyWigSoftware 8.0 for everyone in the public. Thus we find the most
common open format to release the data for public use. The additional
benefit of this allows for users to use the information in ways we
didn't design; OpenOffice, Linux, Solaris, OS X, on a cell phone - we
don't have to figure out how access will happen. We just have to allow
the data to be manipulated and flow into information. Open standards
help us build critical mass to allow consumers (the public) and
employees to access information using standard tools.

Dare I say this issue must be addressed by the Access Board in the
form of "document accessibility"?

I look forward to the discussion!

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: Thursday, January 04, 2007 1:52 AM
To: 'TEITAC General Interface Accessibility Subcommittee';
'TEITAC self contained/closed products subcommittee'; 'TEITAC
Web/Software Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-closed] [teitac-general]
[teitac-websoftware]"Supported by AT"



This is a very important and tricky topic. We have two
situations/choices -- neither of which is tolerable. (and a third
which fails 508 and standards)..





1) we don't allow any technology to be used that isn't
supported by the AT being used by everyone (including people with very
old AT)

a. this isn't tolerable because it holds back technology
progress

2) we allow technology to be used even if only supported by
the latest most expensive AT

a. this is OK for government employees if the government
commits to providing this. In fact is should be just fine.

b. This isn't tolerable for public information. It
restricts public information to only those who are rich or who have a
company (job) to pay for it for them. It could leave 1/3 or more
without access.



3) we allow technology to be used even if only supported by
Future AT

a. not being accessible except for AT that doesn't exist -
doesn't make the product accessible to people with disabilities. So it
fails the performance criteria of the standards and the intent and whole
reason for 508





Since 1 and 2 are both not logical - and #3 fails 508 intent
and wording - we need to find a way to bring up the bottom.
However, that is outside of our guidelines process. So what we need to
do is to write the guidelines so that brining the bottom up yields
instant reward to all. And that not we don't write them so that we can
just walk away from those at the bottom and still 'conform'. And then
work outside of this process to address the problem - rather than write
things so that we can ignore it.





Lots to think about.






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

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