Thread Subject: Re: SubpartA- Draft-(g)Productswithnarrowdelineated use,Add Personal Use to front. and

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: Thu, Mar 29 2007 7:25 AM

I think "point of sale" (POS) devices would be E&IT. They are data input
and processing devices.

But they shouldn't be in the category for this exception. They aren't
personal devices. We wouldn't suggest that people bring their own or have
point of sale devices purchased for their personal use.



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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> David Poehlman
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:39 PM
> To: TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] SubpartA-
> Draft-(g)Productswithnarrowdelineated use, Add Personal Use
> to front. and
>
> I agree with this. It might be prudent to flesh this out
> into a category in order to keep it in play. If cell phones
> and pagers can be inccludeed, digital medical devices and
> point of ssale devices certainly can.
>
> On Mar 22, 2007, at 2:19 AM, Debbie Cook wrote:
>
> Digital medical products would probably be E&IT.
>
> And the cash register introduces an entirely different
> concept. Now, in addition to exempting the calculators et al,
> we're now talking about exempting big items. (Some per
> centage of the copiers etc.) So I'm wondering if it leaves a
> little band in the middle and where are the lines?
> I've been
> very in favor of legitimizing some of what goes on already in
> the name of defining and ultimately limiting it, but now
> we're working both ends.
> And
> this worries me a lot. Why then should all of anything be
> accessible? If we're only going to buy a couple of the
> accessible ones, who is going to make them? What will it be
> worth to them? If there's no mass production, the accessible
> ones will cost too much. And they won't be there when needed.
> I haven't been inclined to be an extremest, but I would move
> that way rather than to exempt everything except computer
> hardware and software.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; "'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'"
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 11:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] SubpartA-
> Draft-(g)Productswithnarrowdelineated use,Add Personal Use to
> front. and
>
>
> Hmmmm
> Are these E&IT?
>
> The cash registers is a good one to discuss.
> But thermometers and glucometers and stethescopes?
>
> Are we talking about the cash register as an item for
> exemption category we have been discussing for personal calculators?
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Diane
> > Golden
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 3:56 PM
> > To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Subpart A-
> > Draft-(g)Productswithnarrowdelineated use, Add Personal Use
> to front.
> > and
> >
> > I think we're a bit too stuck in the "office environment"
> > trying to identify the kinds of products that need the
> "narrow use -
> > readily substitutable"
> > exception. We have issues in state government with things
> like cash
> > registers, do we need to buy all of them with speech output
> options,
> > large visual display screens, etc.?
> > Same with small medical products like thermometers and
> glucometers (do
> > they all need to talk)? Do all stethescopes need to be amplified?
> > I'm sure there are many similar examples in other "non-office" type
> > environments that are part of government agencies.
> >
> > Diane Golden
> > NASCIO
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]On Behalf Of Debbie
> > Cook
> > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 2:22 PM
> > To: TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Subpart A-
> > Draft-(g)Productswithnarrowdelineated use,Add Personal Use
> to front.
> > and
> >
> >
> > Thismay come down to someting like electronic office supplies.
> > Calculators may abe about all that come into it frankly.
> Most agencies
> > have contracts for cell phones, even small printersetc. The
> key would
> > be user selectable if it exists. In my office we don't even get to
> > select the calculators except from a particular group.
> Common practice
> > is that employees routinely select these and in this case
> they would
> > not all have to be accessible or could have different
> accessibility.
> > But if procurement is tightly controlled, thn no prodeucts
> including
> > the calculator would fly on this. So maybe the key is not
> the type of
> > product as much as how procurement decisions are made.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > To: "'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'"
> > < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 12:02 PM
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Subpart A- Draft
> > -(g)Productswithnarrowdelineated use,Add Personal Use to front. and
> >
> >
> > A desk phone is not what I would think of as "Personal use
> item that
> > can be bought out of office funds". They are expensive and
> have to be
> > part of the overall system. Also, people use more that just the
> > phones on their own desks. The use them in common areas, meeting
> > rooms, and even other offices.
> >
> >
> >
> > I thought this was meant to apply to things like 'calculators' and
> > other small personal use items.
> >
> > Maybe we should first make a list of things that people
> think are and
> > are not in this new category that we are thinking of creating an
> > exception for.
> > Then figure out how to describe it. And whether it is a good
> > idea. I
> > think it is a good idea - if we can write it so that it can't be
> > misapplied easily.
> >
> > I would think of things in this category as including/excluding
> >
> >
> > THINGS THAT ARE IN THE EXCEPTION
> > - calculators
> > - personal printer (under $300) (if everyone has a different one on
> > their desk).
> > - cell phones if people are allowed to pick their own (but
> not if they
> > have to use one from a pool or all get the same one)
> > - PDA if people are allowed to pick their own (but not if
> they have to
> > use one from a pool or all get the same one)
> >
> > THINGS THAT ARE NOT
> > - personal workstations
> > - shared devices like
> > -- fax
> > -- copier
> > -- printers
> > -- Cell phones - if everyone has the same type
> >
> >
> > Huh, interesting exercise. I'm not coming up with too many
> > things for
> > examples for the exception and it seems to depend on whether it is
> > common practice for people to get their own type - or whether the
> > management and perhaps IT system and support requires /
> wants everyone
> > to use the same type.
> >
> >
> > Other people, take a crack. What would your lists of
> examples look
> > like.
> >
> >
> >
> > Gregg
> > -- ------------------------------
> > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> >
> >

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