Thread Subject: Re: Topic for Discussion
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: Lybarger, Barbara (MOD)
Date: Tue, Jan 09 2007 1:05 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Salaets, Ken: "Re: Topic for Discussion"
- Previous message in thread: firstname.lastname@example.org: "Re: Topic for Discussion"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
As an employer who routinely supports three individuals who use vision
related AT, and over the years who has supported lots more. I would
prefer the documentation include all the keyboard commands required in
the technical standards sections. I have three reasons.
First, employees come in at all kinds of skill levels, and having the
equivalent keyboard commands right in the documentation puts people with
disabilities on the same level with every other new user.
Second, where documentation includes basic level instructions for
non-disabled users, one can and should assume the owner of the software
thought that level of documentation was necessary and appropriate. If
it's necessary and appropriate for non-disabled used, equivalent
keyboard commands should also be there for disabled users.
Third, all the commands are needed because employees with disabilities
are more often than not part of a team. The technical support folks,
co-workers and supervisors of disabled workers need to be able to
provide technical support for folks with disabilities that is meaningful
for the team to work effectively. That falls apart when one gets stuck
on a command that might be basic for an experienced AT user but isn't
for the user at hand, and the rest of the support team for that position
doesn't use AT and therefore hasn't a clue what the command is and has
no readily available place to look it up.
Finally, some might suggest that an appendix with a keyboard command
list is a viable alternative to including the commands right in the
step-by-step instructions. I've tried to do that and found that it is
very cumbersome and confusing because the technical name for commands
often has nothing to do with what the command does, and for some reason
those who write these appendices often list the information
alphabetically by the key strokes used, rather than the function one is
attempting to execute.
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 10:27 AM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: [teitac-documentation] Topic for Discussion
Hello everyone. In an effort to keep us all moving towards our final
goal of beginning to answer all of the questions we have raised, the
co-chairs have decided that we will be posting on issue from the issue
list on the Wiki every day. Please respond to the listserv with your
answers and they will be compiled on the Wiki issues page. If you want
to see the model, the issue page now includes some responses to the
questions from Jim Tobias.
Today's issue: Should keyboard short cuts be required on every step of
a process listed in the documentation?
Assistant Vice President, Government Relations
1425 K Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005
Please note change of address effective 6/26/06:
Be an angel of change. You can change the lives of people living with
disabilities. Earn your wings at http://www.easterseals.com
- Next message in Thread: Salaets, Ken: "Re: Topic for Discussion"
- Previous message in Thread: email@example.com: "Re: Topic for Discussion"