Thread Subject: Re: 1194.23(k)(2) - OOPS

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: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Sun, Mar 11 2007 7:05 PM

OOPs - Tom I see what you mean.



The same Access Board doc says



Provision Requirements

* Controls and keys should be operable with one hand.
* Controls and keys should not require tight grasping.
* Controls and keys should not require tight pinching.
* Controls and keys should not require tight twisting of the wrist.



So yes Tom - we have an Access Board doc that says it the other way too.



We should get this clarified from the Access Board as to what they DO mean.
Also what "tight twisting of the wrist" means.








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






_____


From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 8:50 PM
To: 'TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee'
Subject: RE: [teitac-hardware] 1194.23(k)(2)

Hi Tom,



I think Randy was attempting humor with his consensus comment (he even
'grinned').



But to walk the issue further. .





I went to the document from the Access-Board that you cite below and this is
what is there.

"If the knobs can be operated within the 22.2 N force limit and without
requiring the user to twist, pinch or tightly grasp, then they would
conform."





Also, courts are there to argue the intent when it is not clear from the
language. But we are in the position of recommending to the Access Board
what that language should be. The best language is that which the courts
do not need to puzzle out. I don't think we should keep language that
isn't clear.





You also asked

"Do we really mean to say that we will allow no twisting of the wrist while
using a control or key? "

I think that is the wrong question. Nothing talks about not 'allowing'
twisting. The concern is about controls that 'require' twisting of the
wrist.

So yes we allow rotation of the wrist. I use it when I use my keyboard.
But I have friends who use the keyboard and do not. They use mouthsticks,
prosthetic hands, hands in braces, etc. The problem is controls that
require twisting of the wrist, - because there are many people who can't.
So yes, I think we do want to talk about no twisting of the wrist being
required if a control is to be accessible.



I want to comment again - that that does not mean controls that twist are
not allowed. Lever handles work great and they twist. You just don't need
to twist the wrist to use them (although I do when I use them - except when
my hands are full).



As Jim pointed out, more and more we are looking at a pushbutton world
where this is very easy to meet. But they still are around and
inaccessible when they occur.



I'm surprised at the amount of discussion on this rather standard item. Is
there a type of control that you think this would prevent that isn't
obvious? The ones I that come to mind are smooth round knobs, little round
knobs, or round knobs that don't turn easily. What are you envisioning
that would be prevented by this that couldn't be easily met by other
approaches? Maybe that would help clarify the problem here.



Thanks




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






_____


From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Thomas Albin
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 6:58 PM
To: TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] 1194.23(k)(2)

No, I don't think that there was agreement to revise the interpretation of
this wording. I think that the original intent was to preserve it as it
was; i.e. where tight modified grasp, twist and pinch. Frankly, it allows
some wiggle room for interpretation.



Secondly, and again respectfully, I don't think that it was someone
arbitrarily interpreting what was meant. For example, we might want to
consider that the Access Board interpreted tight as modifying grasping,
twisting, and pinching,
see(http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/telecomm-course.htm).



Courts exist to argue what the intent is or was and we have to live with
what they determine, regardless of what we thought or intended to mean. We
certainly want to make our language and intent as clear as possible.



Do we really mean to say that we will allow no twisting of the wrist while
using a control or key? If so, then what do we mean by twisting? Do we
want to say that there should be no Pronation/supination, flexion/extension,
radial/ulnar deviation while keying? If we say no twisting, then I think
that is how the revision will be interpreted. Of course that then leaves
open the question as to what the fixed value should be.



Tom



On Mar 10, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Randy Marsden (Home) wrote:



So, we've established that the word "tight" can be used as an adverb for
grasping, pinching, twisting, (and my controller's purse-strings - although
then it would technically be an adjective). <grin>

But as it relates to 1194.23(k)(2), can we agree that we want to make the
clause as strong as possible by not limiting it to only "tight" pinching and
"tight" twisting? We would accomplish this by simply moving "tight
grasping" to the end of the list. If we make the word "tight" apply to all
the actions listed, I believe it would result in a weakening of the existing
508 provision, which the Access Board has directed us not to do.

-Randy



------------------------------------------------
Randy Marsden
President & CEO, Madentec Limited
ATIA Global Policy Chair

780-450-8926 ext. 223
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =




From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Reply-To: "TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 11:23:56 -0600
To: "'TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee'"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] 1194.23(k)(2)



Grin



I was talking about the INTENT of the rule. Not what someone interpreted it
to mean. If we want to use legal interpretations to write our regs then
we have to also allow Braille as a method for deaf people to get access.



We are now writing the revision to the Regulations. When we see things like
"tight twisting of the wrist" like you just pointed out it should remove our
doubts that we should change the way this is worded so that it can't be
misinterpreted.



In that case they should have been talking about "tight grasping".
You don't need to pinch the towel to get it out. You need to grasp and pull
it. A 'pinching' motion can be used to grasp the paper towel but
'pinching' is not required.



How / where did you find this ruling? Is there a collection like this
somewhere? It would be of great value to the group here.



Thanks.


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







_____


From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Thomas Albin
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 11:06 AM
To: TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] 1194.23(k)(2)

I respectully disagree. In a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice and
then settled by agreement, the following statement appears: "The paper towel
dispenser is inaccessible because the controls require tight twisting of the
wrist or tight pinching to advance the paper." Clearly the Department of
Justice, the Court and the Defendant believe that "tight" modifies twisting
and pinching and grasping. The reference is "SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH UNDER THE AMERICANS
WITH DISABILITIES ACT DJ 204-77-63".



Tom Albin



On Mar 10, 2007, at 12:38 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:



Hi Debbie,



The gripping isn't one of the items.



The three provisions are



Grasping

Pinching

Twisting



"tight can't apply to all three. Tight twisting doesn't make sense.



And pinching doesn't work even if light. It just is outside the ability of

many people with different disabilities.



Only grasping is allowed and only if not tight.





Make sense?





Gregg

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

Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.







-----Original Message-----

From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of

Debbie Cook

Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 3:27 PM

To: TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee

Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] 1194.23(k)(2)



I don't support the proposed change. I believe "tight"

applies to all of the actions. No tight gripping, no tight

grasping etc.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Thomas Albin" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >

To: "TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee"

< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >

Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:22 PM

Subject: [teitac-hardware] 1194.23(k)(2)





Sorry to be such a broken record on this, but I still don't

understand whether or not a decision was made regarding the

recommendation to the committee regarding 1194.23(k)(2). It

was originally proposed to leave the language as currently

written in 508, e.g. "...and shall not require tight

grasping, pinching or twisting of the wrist" . I thought

that I heard a decision to re- word this as "...and shall not

require pinching, twisting of the

wrist or tight grasping"? Was a decision made regarding this?

Tom Albin

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