Thread Subject: Re: web/software and general interface/subpartA
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: Wed, Mar 28 2007 11:40 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: David Poehlman: "Re: web/software and general interface/subpartA"
- Previous message in thread: David Poehlman: "Re: web/software and general interface/subpartA"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
It would not have to be.
Lets examine a potential instance.
A provisions says:
When software provides x,y,z a,b,c requirement is applicable.
another one says
When web pages include functionality that does x,y,z, a,b,c is
Basically all one has to do is match the characteristic in the provision
to the set of things that are being done, so if you are doing web and
software you would pick both provisions.
Allen hoffman -- 202-447-0303
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of David
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:15 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] web/software and general
looks like a lot of flipping back and forth to me.
On Mar 28, 2007, at 2:04 PM, Hoffman, Allen wrote:
interesting idea brought up today about using the specific language and
selection rules to define applicability of provisions to specific
technologies or characteristics of technologies.
The rules for determining applicability *must* be documentable for this
idea to work, and therefore could be documented into the standard in
subpart A applicability:
provisions from subpart B shall be applicable when terms from a
characteristic from (reference) are included in the provision language.
It is intended that such a match indicates that the specific provision
is applicable to such technologies which include such characteristics.
Self encoded applicability! Great.
Seems like it would make any legal discussion an short one.
- Next message in Thread: David Poehlman: "Re: web/software and general interface/subpartA"
- Previous message in Thread: David Poehlman: "Re: web/software and general interface/subpartA"