Thread Subject: Re: Keyboard proposal
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: Andi Snow-Weaver
Date: Wed, Sep 19 2007 8:50 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: None
- Previous message in thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Keyboard proposal"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
It's mean to exclude things like free-form drawing and water color painting
which the subcommittee feels require an unreasonable number of keystrokes
in order to be keyboard operable. This provision is harmonized with WCAG
2.0 and we will be able to refer to the WCAG supplementary material to
further explain the provision and provide sufficient techniques for meeting
The sentence about timing is meant to apply to keyboard operations only so
shouldn't be a security issue. It just means that the keyboard operation
you provide cannot be dependent on the time a user presses a key.
In this rev of the provision, we were only trying to resolve an issue that
was raised about the scoping of this requirement. In the current 508
standard, it is scoped to devices that have keyboards. The technical
requirements in this provision have been closed for some time.
B - Washington,
<Norman.B.Robinso "TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee"
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Sent by: >
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Re: [teitac-websoftware] Keyboard
Please respond to
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Objection: "not just the endpoints" means nothing to me (and I expect
others); it isn't clear or understandable.
Suggestion: An alternative to time dependent input must always be
Comment: The requirement for timed input always having an alternative
(e.g., always allow user to request more time) will require many
security based requirements to document an exception to Section 508.
Also, since I am unsure if Sentence #2 ("Specific timing...") is related
to Sentence #3 ("This provision does not apply...") I would appreciate
clarification in the keyboard proposal to aid in understanding.
Norman B. Robinson
Section 508 Coordinator
IT Governance, US Postal Service
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andi
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 2:50 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Keyboard proposal
So, this looks like our final wording for the keyboard operation
Where products have a keyboard or a keyboard interface, all
of the product operable through the user interface must be operable
the keyboard, or a keyboard interface. Specific timing for individual
keystrokes must not be required. This provision does not apply where
underlying function requires input that depends on the full path of the
user's movement, not just the endpoints.
Note: Keyboard interface can be either a hardware keyboard interface, a
wireless interface or a software keyboard interface where AT can
keystrokes that would be seen by software.
Objections only please.
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Keyboard proposal"