Thread Subject: Re: Startingdiscussionson theAccessibility APIproposal

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: Travis Roth
Date: Fri, Jan 05 2007 8:20 AM

Jessica Brody wrote:
"ATIA would rather see enumerations written in broad brush strokes, not the
specifics that would indicate "use this particular accessibility API.""
And:
"We need to focus on the end results - what we want to be able to achieve,
not the means of getting there."

In reading the current "accesibility API" proposal it seems this is exactly
what it does, or is intended to do. I do not find anywhere where it
specifies how the implementation of the API should be carried out technology
wise?
It seems much more useful in stating what the end result should be than the
current 1194.21(c), 1194.21(d) and 1194.21(f) standards do.

I understand there is some desire to make broad statements that will stand
forever. However, it is entirely possible to make these type of statements
that cannot actually be used in the real world.
There needs to be a way for all parties involved to have "testable" items so
that compliance can be determined.

--
Travis Roth
Production Manager
TecAccess, LLC
(804) 749-8646 (office)
(402) 466-0907 (direct)
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
www.TecAccess.net
Experts in Section 508 Compliance & Accessibility

NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient or believe that you may
have
received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating
that fact and delete the copy you received. Thank you.

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