Thread Subject: Re: intro for 8.1?

From: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Thu, Sep 20 2007 12:45 PM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: Jim Tobias: "Re: intro for 8.1?"
• Previous message in thread: Andrew Kirkpatrick: "Re: intro for 8.1?"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

Point taken.
Let me consider a bit and will post with a walk through of how this can
work.



Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andrew
Kirkpatrick
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 2:36 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] intro for 8.1?

This seems like a lot of additional overhead for a mere sanity check.
I'm envisioning a lot of confusion for procurement people when they
receive a 16 page VPAT for a product that outputs in 5 different formats
and needs to include information about the capabilities of the format
for each. Do you really expect that these people will cross-reference
the product section 3 VPAT information against the various section 8
items for the format because it might reveal that the product VPAT
author is declaring something that they shouldn't?

AWK


> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Hoffman, Allen
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 1:07 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] intro for 8.1?
>
> Look at it as a sanity check.
> If you state that, for example, you meet the language requirement in
> 3, but select a format that doesn't include that capacity, something
> is wrong.
>
>
>
> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 1:04 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] intro for 8.1?
>
> Allen,
>
> You state "When determining the most accessible product from a set of
> more than one, the format information is provided in can determine if
> other requirements can be met or not" but just because a format
> includes support for a particular standard it doesn't mean that the
> product that uses that format takes advantage of that support.
>
> How do you envision the support for the content formats being defined?
> Does each content format have a VPAT? If so, who writes it?
>
> Part of my concern with the implementation of this section is that the

> product is already reporting on how they support standards that
> overlap with the content format items - I'm not sure that it will
> actually help in procurement decisions since the product needs to meet

> the section 3 standards, and the section 8 standards not only don't
> bring anything new to the picture but they are not necessarily
> representative of the accessibility in the specific product.
>
> AWK
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> > Hoffman, Allen
> > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:43 AM
> > To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] intro for 8.1?
> >
> > All:
> >
> > Several people have raised questions related to how
> provisions in 8.1
> > relate to other sections. I think I'd like to propose an update to
> > the draft for 09/14 to include some intro materials to
> alleviate this
> > concern, as it is obvious some connection is needed to make this
> > self-evident.
> >
> > So:
> >
> > Sections 3 and 6 above require that information delivered must be
> > presented meeting accessibility requirements. To accomplish this,
> > information storage formats must allow for inclusion of certain
> > accessibility related attributes and/or functionalities.
> This section
>
> > describes the functional accessibility requirements for
> such formats.
> > When determining the most accessible product from a set of
> more than
> > one, the format information is provided in can determine if other
> > requirements can be met or not, and can be an important
> factor in the
> > final determination. Note:
> > Formats which do not include some functionalities such as
> the ability
> > to represent synchronized media, would not be subject to that
> > provision.
> >
> >
> >

• Next message in Thread: Jim Tobias: "Re: intro for 8.1?"
• Previous message in Thread: Andrew Kirkpatrick: "Re: intro for 8.1?"