Thread Subject: Re: Definitions of AT - Suggestions

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: jagbell
Date: Mon, May 28 2007 7:45 AM

The language "such as but not limited to" is critical but it is also
critical that the items are listed in alphabetical order so that one
item is not more important than another.

The reason we need to list is that no one outside maybe a 100
people :) understands what assistive technology is.:) In the past
few week, I have been asked countless times, "is there a list in the
law that I can refer to". When I explain that the language is meant
to be tailored to the individual, the person who is supposed to
implement the access is exasperated. While this has been in the
museum setting, it has also been in the National Park setting. It
sounds wonderful in theory but in reality, no one understands
generalities. Therefore nothing gets done because no one has time to
do the research or if it does get done, the information gathered is
based on what vendors want to sell.:)

On a personal note, years ago, the Department of Education did not
want to provide a service that was clearly needed and required .
They told me that they were not required to provide it. When I
showed then the service was listed in the legislation with "such as
but not limited to" language, the service was provided. :) If this
list was not provided, I would have had to sue them. People who have
disabilities can make suing people a full-time job. :) This is not a
good option. Clarity is.

The way the law is set-up now is clearly not working. It is time for
a change and the use of the language"such as but not limited to" with
examples listed in alphabetical order can be inserted and used as a
guide and starting point for appropriate access. We as a group need
to remember that the goal here is to not only assist the procurement
officers but also the end user who can point to legal language to
obtain what they need when there may be an artificial barrier (a
boss :) ) who is preventing the person from obtaining the appropriate
access they need to have appropriate access.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend!

Best,

Janice






On May 25, 2007, at 3:58 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

> Concur.
>
>
>
> Also we don't want to start listing AT. Where do you stop. Who
> feels left out. Dangerous way to define.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
>
>
> I don't agree that equivalents such as audio description or
> captioning are assistive technology. An argument could be made
> that a caption decoder is AT, but not the captions.
>
> AWK
>
>
>
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:teitac-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of jagbell
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 3:09 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Definitions of AT - Suggestions
>
> I have added my additions below in red. Please note, my
> suggestions are in alphabetical order. :)
>
>
>
>
>
> On May 25, 2007, at 2:40 PM, Diane Golden wrote:
>
>
>
>
> The following is what I have drafted based on the feedback at the
> meeting. New language is in CAPS.
>
> Diane
>
>
>
> Assistive Technology means any item, piece of equipment, or system,
> whether acquired commercially, modified, or customized, that is
> commonly used to increase, maintain, or improve functional
> capabilities of individuals with disabilities. AS USED IN THIS
> PART, THE TERM INCLUDES TRADITIONAL ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY HARDWARE
> AND SOFTWARE ALONG WITH VIRTUAL ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY DELIVERED AS A
> WEB SERVICE AND INTEGRATION OF PRODUCTS INTO A SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES
> ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY FUNCTIONS ALLOWING INDIVIDUALS WITH
> DISABILITIES TO ACCESS ELECTRONIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY such
> as but not limited to assistive listening devices, audio
> description, captioning.
>
>
>
> Diane Cordry Golden, Ph.D., Director
> Missouri Assistive Technology
> 816/350-5280 (direct voice)
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> www.at.mo.gov
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:teitac-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]On Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:22 PM
> To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Definitions of AT - Suggestions
>
> Generally notes that are immediately adjacent a definition in a
> standard cannot change the meaning in the standard but can explain
> what it already says. So they don't have the same effect as the
> definition – but since they are explaining what it says – the
> definition would convey their weight. However – for the
> regulations it may be that any notes would end up back in the front
> matter rather than with the definition. In that case we may want
> to / need to embed the info in the definition somehow. Like
>
> Definition
>
> Assistive technology: Assistive technology means …… devices,
> systems (including web services and integrated products that
> deliver assistive services), yada yada yada.
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:teitac-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jessica M. Brodey
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 7:56 AM
> To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Definitions of AT - Suggestions
>
> This revised definition addresses ATIA’s concerns stated yesterday
> during the Subpart A report. We would support adopting this. One
> question – should Note 1 and Note 2 be treated as subsections and
> included in the regulation to give it the same force as the
> definition?
>
> Jessica
>
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:teitac-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 2:11 PM
> To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
> Subject: [teitac-subparta] Definitions of AT - Suggestions
>
> A way to meet the concerns that led to including the term “SERVICE”
> and “IN ACCESSING E&IT”
>
> (without creating the problems and grief that will come from trying
> to change the definition of AT)
>
> might be to keep definition but add notes that would be included
> with the definition .
>
> like this:
>
> Definition
>
> Assistive technology: Assistive technology means…etc etc etc
> (standard definition)
>
> Note 1: Virtual Assistive technology delivered as a web service,
> and integration of different products into a system that provides
> assistive functions to people with disabilities, are two examples
> of things that are included in the term ‘systems’ in this definition.
>
> Note 2: Within this Part, Assistive Technology means Assistive
> technology used in accessing E&IT.
>
>
> 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/> FAX 608/262-8848
>
> DSS Player at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b
>
> If Attachement is a mail.dat try http://www.kopf.com.br/winmail/
>
>
>

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