Thread Subject: Re: 2.2 If the Product has Speech Output orThroughput

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: Phill Jenkins
Date: Sat, Sep 29 2007 8:30 AM

Gregg, this was an editorial comment - that the text in the 2.2 provisions
A through F did not match the title - 'audio output' vs 'speech output'.
Because of the mismatch, I thought it applied to all audio output, but
apparently the title is correct and its the provisions A through F that
need editing to make it clearer. All the 2.2 provisions A through F say
"audio output", except 2.2-E uses "incoming voice signals", and 2.2-D
explicitly uses both:
Product Characteristics: Sound output – speech, Sound output
(other than speech)

So the text needs to be tightened up in the next editorial pass to avoid
the confusion.
I'm not suggesting it be broadened unless that was the intent of the
subcommittee.

http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_Sept_14#2.2_If_the_Product_has_Speech_Output_or_Throughput

Regards,
Phill Jenkins




Gregg Vanderheiden < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent by: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
09/29/2007 12:37 AM
Please respond to
TEITAC Committee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >


To
"'TEITAC Committee'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
cc

Subject
Re: [teitac-committee] 2.2 If the Product has Speech Output orThroughput






These provisions only apply if there is speech that comes out of or
through a product. If you change it to Audio – it will spread the need
to apply these to other technologies where it is not necessary.

Is there a reason you see to broaden the applicability of these
provisions?

Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Phill
Jenkins
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 3:46 PM
To: TEITAC Committee
Subject: [teitac-committee] 2.2 If the Product has Speech Output
orThroughput

Editorial comment: The heading of 2.2 sounds odd to me to use the terms
'Speech' and 'Throughput'. All the provisions 2.2 A through F seem to use
the term 'audio output', so I think it would make the standards more
intuitive to use the term 'audio output'. I suppose 'throughput' could
stay if that is left over from 255, and/or if we are including components
that process the audio. The TPs really only talk about the audio
connections and volume - nothing about microphones, inputs, or even the
term throughput.

Regards,
Phill Jenkins

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