Thread Subject: Re: "closed software"
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: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Fri, Feb 23 2007 8:35 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: James Elekes: "Re: "closed software""
- Previous message in thread: Jim Tobias: "Re: "closed software""
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
This is currently in the software standard at CFR1194.21(b,g). It could
be referenced in the .25 portion.
Allen Hoffman -- 202-447-0303
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:14 AM
To: 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
Cc: 'TEITAC self contained/closed products subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] [teitac-closed] "closed software"
Jonathan Avila wrote:
"What I'm trying to articulate is that the current hardware standards
are insufficient for this type of kiosk that uses a standard OS such as
XP. For example, the current standard 1194.25(h) only requires that a
range of color/contrast settings be available if the color settings can
Since the program is running on XP the colors can be changed in the OS
and thus I think the kiosk application should honor those settings."
This is interesting. I think you're saying that if a "closed" product
has an underlying OS that has accessibility features, those features
should be exposed in the product's interface. I'm not opposed to
incorporating that idea, but it might require us to list or otherwise
identify what those features are, something that the current 508 rule
slides by by referring to "features ... that are identified as
accessibility features, where those features are developed and
documented according to industry standards". (As an aside, we recently
evaluated a consumer electronics product whose documentation includes a
GPL licensing statement for Linux. It's unclear what part of Linux
actually is embedded in the product, but perhaps Linux accessibility
features might be available.)
A related step would be to require those "accessibility features" in all
OS-related purchases covered by 508. As it stands, a vendor *could*
market an OS with no accessibility features, seriously complicating 508
application software compliance.