Thread Subject: Re: Proposed Standard Connections Language
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: Mon, Jun 18 2007 1:51 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Tom Brett: "Re: Proposed Standard Connections Language"
- Previous message in thread: Jim Tobias: "Re: Proposed Standard Connections Language"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
Concur - but we need to clean it up.
I think we agreed to put 'user' in front of 'interface' and 'user
interface' in front of connections.
But I think we missed the "input or output connection capabilities".
We do need to address it but "user interface input or output connection
capabilities" sounds very awkward and redundant (though it isn't)
How about "user interface connection capabilities".
Does that leave anything out?
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim Tobias
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 6:26 PM
To: 'TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] Proposed Standard Connections Language
i think we agreed on putting "user interface" in front of "input or output
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 3:42 PM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: [teitac-hardware] Proposed Standard Connections Language
In today's Hardware subcommittee call, we discussed proposed language for
Standard Connections. This language was drafted to address the current
standard ports language.
Where input or output connection capabilities are provided, whether wired or
wireless, at least one connection shall comply with publicly available
industry standards and all of the user interface functionality available on
the non-standard connection(s) would be available on the standard
One element of discussion to which there was some difference in the
committee had to do with the inclusion of "or provide an adapter".
Rob Nerhood | Experience Design Group | Ergonomics Engineer
Dell, Inc. | One Dell Way | Round Rock, Texas 78682 - 7000
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.
- Next message in Thread: Tom Brett: "Re: Proposed Standard Connections Language"
- Previous message in Thread: Jim Tobias: "Re: Proposed Standard Connections Language"