Thread Subject: Re: 21 g - revision

From: Lybarger, Barbara (MOD)
Date: Tue, Mar 27 2007 6:30 AM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: Andi Snow-Weaver: "Re: 21 g - revision"
• Previous message in thread: Barrett, Don: "Re: 21 g - revision"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

The problem is that what works for one person doesn't work for another.
The precise vision deficit dictates what contrast and what colors the
individual perceives.

I'm more concerned with the last phrase. How does one show that "...
the availability of those selections are developed and documented as
standard operating system functions." (1) Can this be more specific
about what constitutes sufficiently developed and documented? (2) Even
if this might be a topic for sub regulatory guidance, should the
subcommittee suggest what would be appropriate? (3) Do the tools
supplied by a particular application have any role in this?

Barbara Lybarger

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg
Vanderheiden
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 5:40 PM
To: 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] 21 g - revision

Hmmm
This has the same problem. "What if they are not?"


Can we just specify real values of contrast that should be possible?


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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Barrett, Don
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 4:22 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] 21 g - revision
>
> What about
>
> "Applications shall display themselves utilizing user selected
> contrast and color selections and other individual display attributes
> when the availability of those selections are developed and documented

> as standard operating system functions."
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg

> Vanderheiden
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 4:58 PM
> To: 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
> Subject: [teitac-websoftware] 21 g - revision
>
> The proposed (new) wording is:
>
>
>
> Applications shall utilize user selected contrast and color selections

> and other individual display attributes when the availability of those

> selections are developed and documented according to industry
> standards.
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm not sure this will work. The proposed new wording
> appears to not
> be testable as formulated and appears to be more limited than the
> original.
>
>
>
> Some questions
>
>
>
> 1) What if there are no industry standards? Do you not have to
> respect user settings?
>
> - What are the industry standards for documentation?
>
> - What are the industry standards for development.
>
> We would need to define these terms and point to the industry standard

> in order to allow anyone to use this.
>
>
>
> 2) This provision seems to say that you don't have to honor user
> settings if the settings are not developed using the standards.
>
>
>
> 3) The term 'utilize' is also unclear. Does this mean follow? Or
> just use them in their calculations?
>
>
>
>
>
> The old wording had no such conditions so this would be considerably
> weaker.
>
>
>
> Can we use wording like WCAG?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Gregg
>
> ------------------------
>
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center
> University of Wisconsin-Madison
> <http://trace.wisc.edu/ <http://trace.wisc.edu/> > FAX 608/262-8848
>
> DSS Player at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b <http://tinyurl.com/dho6b>
>
> <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/>
>
>
>
>
>
>

• Next message in Thread: Andi Snow-Weaver: "Re: 21 g - revision"
• Previous message in Thread: Barrett, Don: "Re: 21 g - revision"