Thread Subject: Re: Operable Controls Definition

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: Wed, May 30 2007 5:05 PM

Ooooh I hate to use the word "full functionality" but here it is used to
get people out of making everything accessible.

For example. If the user can carry out all of the functionality of the
product from a keyboard for example, there is not a reason for the mouse to
meet all of the "tactile' provision. Blind users would use the keyboard and
not the mouse.

So the goal is to have all functionality available via accessible controls -
not to have all controls be accessible. The latter would require that
touchscreens be accessible to people who are blind. The former would only
require that all functionality of the product (including functionality that
can be achieved from the touchscreen) would be achievable via tactilely
discernable controls.

Can't figure out how to say this without using the word full but you get the
idea.

I concur that the word "normal operation" should be avoided or it needs to
be defined because it is very ambiguous.


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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:52 PM
> To: TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] Operable Controls Definition
>
>
> Peers,
>
> I would like to consider if we are speaking specifically
> about *requires physical contact for normal operation* or is
> it simply *physical controls that affect the operation of the
> product*?
>
> Playing devil's advocate, if I create a control for a
> product that I deem isn't a part of *normal operation* then
> do I get a get-out-of-508-free card? If I create physical
> controls that doesn't require physical contact, because I
> have software that can remotely control the product (e.g.,
> software that controls the copier, email, fax, all-in-one
> printer on my desktop connected to the LAN) and even more
> importantly to my point are *not* accessible without
> previously mentioned software, is that acceptable?
>
> I'd really like to see something that doesn't fail when
> combined with or without accessibility. The terms "required"
> and "normal operation"
> are tied to the accessibility discussion. My point: you have
> operable controls but we shouldn't assume they are accessible.
>
> Suggested definition: "Operable controls: any physical
> control that affects the operation of the product. Operable
> controls include, but are not limited to, mechanically
> operated controls, input and output trays, card slots,
> keyboards, keypads, keys, or buttons, including
> touch-screens." Note I added individual keys and buttons, as
> I've inspected many devices that have only those features
> where the manufacture thought Section 508 didn't apply
> because it didn't have "a full keyboard".
>
> Just my two cents.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Norman B. Robinson
> Section 508 Coordinator
> IT Governance, US Postal Service
> phone: 202.268.8246
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:37 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: [teitac-hardware] Operable Controls Definition
>
>
> The Subpart A subcommittee has asked us to comment on any
> potential changes to the Operable Controls definition. The
> definition is as
> follows:
>
> Operable controls - A component of a product that requires
> physical contact for normal operation. Operable controls
> include, but are not limited to, mechanically operated
> controls, input and output trays, card slots, keyboards, or keypads.
>
> Please provide comment or feedback on this definition so that
> we can close with the Subpart A team.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Randy and Rob
>
> Rob Nerhood | Experience Design Group | Ergonomics
> Engineer Dell, Inc. | One Dell Way | Round Rock, Texas
> 78682 - 7000 direct 512.723.2763 This communication and all
> attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged.
> If you are not the intended recipient, (i) please do not read
> or disclose any content to others, (ii) please notify the
> sender by reply mail immediately, and (iii) please
> permanently delete this communication from your system.
> Failure to follow this process may be unlawful and subject to
> prosecution. Thank you for your cooperation.
>
>

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