Thread Subject: Re: Proposed language for user controls on video programming products

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: Sean Hayes
Date: Thu, Oct 11 2007 8:15 AM

I understand your focus on the specifics of AV access, but I do think this is a general concept that needs to be articulated, as its appropriate for all kinds of products. Since 508 deals with products operated by agencies I think it is right to use 1.2A, regardless of its origins in telecom. It should be possible for a person with a disability to do the configuration don't you think?

Perhaps we could keep the new language I suggested for 1.2 A (see reply to Gregg today), but create a reference to it from the AV section and move examples 1 and 2 under that reference. I'm not sure exactly what that cross reference would look like, I'll give it more thought.

Sean Hayes
Incubation Lab
Accessibility Business Unit
Microsoft

Office: +44 118 909 5867,
Mobile: +44 7875 091385


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Karen Peltz Strauss
Sent: 11 October 2007 12:29
To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee; 'Dave Singer'; 'Al Sonnenstrahl'; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; 'Toby R. Silver'; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Cc: Rosaline Crawford; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: [teitac-video] Proposed language for user controls on video programming products

Here is another attempt at proposed language for user controls on video
programming products. I have taken a little bit from Dave's, Sean's and
Gregg's proposals, and here is what I have come up with. By way of
explanation: First, this really should stay in the audio-video section of
the guidelines, not a general section where it is likely to be overlooked.
We are talking about very specific types of controls for accessing
television and television-like products and it would be better if we dealt
with this here. Second, this provision does not belong in 1.2-A because
that section deals with activation by the agency - such as when
accessibility is built into a phone system and the agency does not trigger
the switch to turn on the access features built in (this was discussed at
length in the telecom subcommittee where this provision originated).
Third, I agree with Gregg that the examples may get lost, but if we include
some language about comparable prominence to volume and channel controls, I
think that will help. I know there were some concerns about this, and that
is why I added "where the ability to control these features is otherwise
provided." Finally, I tried to put this whole requirement into plain
English - "make the controls easy to find and easy to use":



In order to comply with this subpart, the user controls needed to configure
and activate general and accessibility features on products that receive or
display analog or digital television must be easy to find and easy to use by
people with disabilities. These must be comparable in prominence to the
controls needed to change volume and channels, where the ability to control
these features is otherwise provided.



For example:
1. For captioning: (a) A caption on/off on a TV remote comparable in
prominence to the volume control on that remote; (b) Caption controls on the
first menu that appear when on-screen menus are displayed

2. Audio equivalents to on-screen information and visual menu selections
3. A tactile button to turn on audio equivalents;
4. A user preferences dialog that is accessible and directly reachable from
a login screen.



Karen

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