Thread Subject: Re: Comparable Access

From: David Poehlman
Date: Sat, Jun 02 2007 5:50 AM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Comparable Access"
• Previous message in thread: jagbell: "Re: Comparable Access"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

Hi All,

The word timely here is not appropriate to its stated function. We need to
find a better word. This has more to do with efficiency than timeleness.
Lastly, there's a bit of stuff at the top of this message I quote below that
I don't understand.

"<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
/>"

----- Original Message -----
From: "Diane Golden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access


Thanks Robert. Already made that change based on the discussion at the
plenary meeting. The following is the current version of that section.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
/>

"When determining if individuals with disabilities have access to and use of
information and data that is comparable to that available to individuals
without disabilities, each agency shall ensure that individuals with
disabilities have access that is timely, accurate and complete. Timely
access includes consideration of the speed with which a person with a
disability can use electronic and information technology to access
information or perform a task as compared to an individual without
disabilities. Accurate and complete access ensures that the information and
data reflects the intended meaning especially when converted into another
form or media. "



The rest of the discussion at the plenary meeting was concern expressed at
how this would (or would not) be used in solicitations. I think the
perception of the agency procurement people is that this would NOT be used
in a solicitation, but used internally by agency staff to evaluate if they
are meeting the statute requirements in delivery of access to employees and
the public. One option that might help address this would be to include
this language in the Purpose section (rather than application) as that is
where the reference to having "access to and use of information and data
that is comparable" is found. Other thoughts/suggestions?



Diane Golden



-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]On Behalf Of Baker, Robert
C.
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:07 AM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access



I recommend changing the verbiage to the proposed comparable access
provision to delete the phrase "and in a manner and medium appropriate to
the significance of the message". The intended meaning of this phrase is
very unclear.


Thanks,
Robert

• Next message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Comparable Access"
• Previous message in Thread: jagbell: "Re: Comparable Access"