Thread Subject: Re: todays question

From: David Poehlman
Date: Tue, Jan 16 2007 5:13 PM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: Lybarger, Barbara (MOD): "Re: todays question"
• Previous message in thread: David Poehlman: "Re: todays question"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

Hi Barbara,

I like the idea of a conversation where appropriate between agency
and vendor but it might need to take place with some guidance and a
formal agreement at its conclusion.

On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Lybarger, Barbara (MOD) wrote:

The bottom line is that alternative formats must be available.
Depending on the actual set of parties involved it varies which one
is in the best position to produce the a particular format. What
about leaving it open as a point of negotiation, with the agency
ultimately responsible that the alternative formats be produced as
needed and the vendor obliged to at minium provide digital copy that
can be used to do the formating?

Barbara Lybarger

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of
Debbie Cook
Sent: Thu 1/11/2007 6:48 PM
To: TEITAC documentation and technical support subcommittee
Cc:
Subject: Re: [teitac-documentation] todays question



I think that providing alternative formats is an accommodation
responsibility of the gency. And, I think there re types of requests
for
alternte formats which may go beyond htose we traditionally think of
particularly when it ocmes to cognitive accommodation. But, having
said all
that, I do believe the manufacturer has the obligation to create
environments where alternative formats can be readily produced. So I
think a
requirement more that that for text books where the manufacturer has to
provide digital formats is more appropriate and probably more likely
to go
through than expecting every manufacturer to produce the variants of
alternative format that might be requested.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Brett" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC documentation and technical support subcommittee"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: [teitac-documentation] todays question


I agree that the standard should explicitly state that the
manufacturer pays
for the alternate format.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dawn Wilcox
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:35 PM
Subject: [teitac-documentation] todays question


I interpret 1194.41 (a) to mean the manufacturer provides it and
pays for
it. but we could make it more obvious by adding - the manufacturer
pays for
and the agency requests alternate formats. Dawn Wilcox CCLVI



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------

• Next message in Thread: Lybarger, Barbara (MOD): "Re: todays question"
• Previous message in Thread: David Poehlman: "Re: todays question"