Thread Subject: Re: Comparable Access

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: David Poehlman
Date: Tue, Jun 05 2007 9:10 AM

is cost a factor?

----- Original Message -----
From: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access


If two options are available and one is least obtrusive to the user and thus
less stigma, that option should be used. For example, in a conference room,
there is the option of using an induction loop or an FM system. An FM system
requires the person with hearing loss to wear a receiver and a neckloop. An
iduction loop requires the person to just switch their hearing aid to "T".
Why should a person wear a device when they don't have to? This happens all
the time because people don't understand induction loops. :)

Best,

Janice
Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Poehlman < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >

Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:24:43
To:TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access


I'm not diagreeing necessarily, but what does "least intrusive" do?
----- Original Message -----
From: "jagbell" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 6:45 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access


I would just add "in the least intrusive manner.

Janice
On Jun 4, 2007, at 2:52 PM, Jim Tobias wrote:

> i think you nailed this. i agree completely with this draft.
>
> ***
> Jim Tobias
> Inclusive Technologies
> +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> skype jimtobias
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Diane Golden [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
>> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 1:45 PM
>> To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access
>>
>> So here's yet another draft -- revising the language back
>> into a definition and separating timely and efficient.
>>
>> Proposed New Definition of Comparable Access Comparable
>> access means that individuals with disabilities have access
>> to and use of information and data that is timely, accurate,
>> complete and efficient when compared to that available to
>> individuals without disabilities. Timely access ensures that
>> individuals with disabilities have information and data
>> available to them at the same time as individuals without
>> disabilities. Accurate and complete access ensures that the
>> information and data reflects the intended meaning especially
>> when converted into another form or media. Efficiency of
>> 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.
>>
>> Does changing this to a definition help address the concerns
>> about how this would be used or not used in solicitations?
>>
>> Diane
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]On Behalf Of
>> Gregg Vanderheiden
>> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 12:32 PM
>> To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access
>>
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> I think the term "timely" takes on different meanings for
>> 'content' and for 'devices'
>>
>> We should keep that in mind and perhaps reflect it in out language
>>
>>
>>
>> Gregg
>> -- ------------------------------
>> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of David
>>> Poehlman
>>> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 12:14 PM
>>> To: TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee
>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access
>>>
>>> I agree with everything said about this but the note below does not
>>> express this clearly ehough and comparable access is a term
>> oft used
>>> when descriing side by side modalities not alternate formats?
>>> "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
>>>
>>> To me, this more closely addresses an issue such as being
>> able to use
>>> the equipment in a comparable way.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Hoffman, Allen" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>> To: "TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee"
>> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 12:44 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access
>>>
>>>
>>> I concur with Karen. Timely is not the same as efficiency
>> and is the
>>> term we should be using. it was timely, accurate, and
>> complete from
>>> my recollection.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Karen
>>> Peltz Strauss
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 11:02 AM
>>> To: TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access
>>>
>>> Gregg is right. This is a really important point - all too
>> often, the
>>> information is given at a later time, when it is not as
>> relevant, such
>>> as a transcript of a meeting instead of interpreters or captioning
>>> while the meeting is going on. Or a Brailled or electronic
>> version of
>>> something, weeks after sighted people get the printed version. I
>>> watched this happen time and again when I worked in the government.
>>>
>>> Karen
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>> To: "'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'"
>>> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >;
>>> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 12:22 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access
>>>
>>>
>>>> Timely is included to make sure that information and access is
>>>> provided on a timely basis. That is, if others have access to
>>>> information or devices now
>>>> - then people with disabilities should have access now.
>>>>
>>>> I think that would be timely - not efficiency.
>>>>
>>>> However having efficient access is also important.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gregg
>>>> -- ------------------------------
>>>> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>>>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
>> Behalf Of David
>>>>> Poehlman
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 6:47 AM
>>>>> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee
>>>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Comparable Access
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>

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