Thread Subject: Re: Tomorrow's conf call

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: Greg Fields
Date: Thu, Oct 11 2007 10:50 AM

User activation of controls is already defined and covered as follows:

Operable Controls
Any physical control that affects the operation of the product. Operable
controls include, but are not limited to, mechanically operated
controls, input and output trays, card slots, keyboards, keypads, keys,
or buttons, including touch-screens.

Provisions
2.1-C Mechanical Controls
2.1-D Touch Operated Controls
2.1-F Installed or Free-Standing Products
3.P User Interface Components
3.S Keyboard Operation
7.1-C.3 User Interface Descriptions

The definition and abovementioned provisions do encompass user
activation, expected reach range and documentation requirements for
physical/virtual controls that "affect the operation of the product".

Karen - can you clarify how you see "user controls on video programming
products" as different than "any control that affects the operation of
the product"?

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Karen Peltz
Strauss
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 11:37 AM
To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee; 'Dave Singer'; 'Al Sonnenstrahl';
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; 'Toby R. Silver'; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ;
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Tomorrow's conf call

Sean

In answer to this and your prior message, I do not have a problem with
offering a general, more generic provision for the guidelines as a
whole,
but do think we need the section that I am proposing in the audio video
section, even if it is redundant in part. Otherwise it will get lost.
Also, I am afraid that the re-write below is a bit confusing because it
mixes two very different concepts - configuration/activation by the
agency
and activation by individuals - in the same sentence.

The proposed TEITAC re-write does contain a full section on user
interfaces
(currently section 3), so that would probably be the best place to add
something about user activation of controls, if it is needed to
supplement
what that section already has.

Karen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Hayes" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >;
"'Dave
Singer'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; "'Al Sonnenstrahl'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >;
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; "'Toby R. Silver'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >;
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Tomorrow's conf call


> That wouldn't work in the context of 1.2A, which is a general
provision;
> so referring to volume or channel changing controls wouldn't make
sense
> for all products and it loses the sense of David's idea that the means
to
> activate an accessibility feature must be operable by the person that
> needs that feature.
>
> The specific case of raising the prominence of a caption control
really
> is outside of the scope of the provision itself, just as we don't have
any
> specifics on the form of volume controls on phones, or contrast
controls
> in software or on a display - so it does need to be an example.
>
> How about:
> 1.2-A - Accessibility Configuration
> In complying with this subpart, each agency must activate
accessibility
> features and configure products so that they are accessible to and
usable
> by
> people with disabilities, and the means to activate the accessibility
> features and configure products is accessible to those that need those

> features and
> comparable in prominence to similar configuration mechanisms for
general
> operation.
>
> For example:
> 1. A caption on/off on a TV remote comparable in prominence to the
volume
> control on that remote;
> 2. A gain wheel or slider on a telephone receiver handset;
> 3. A tactile button to turn on audio equivalents;
> 4. A user preferences dialog that is accessible and directly reachable

> from
> a login screen.
>
> 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 Gregg
> Vanderheiden
> Sent: 11 October 2007 07:19
> To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'; 'Dave Singer'; 'Al
Sonnenstrahl';
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; 'Toby R. Silver'; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ;
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Tomorrow's conf call
>
> This is good but the examples will be dropped and the rest is pretty
> vague.
> I would see the current menu's as being described as 'discoverable'.
> Even
> with the examples - one can argue that current menus are discoverable.

> How
> about just moving the one phrase up to the provision.
>
>
>
> 1.2-A - Accessibility Configuration
> In complying with this subpart, each agency must activate
accessibility
> features and configure products so that they are accessible to and
usable
> by
> people with disabilities such that the means to activate the
accessibility
> features and configure products is comparable in prominence to the
volume
> or
> channel changing controls.
>
> For example:
> 1. A caption on/off on a TV remote comparable in prominence to the
volume
> control on that remote;
> 2. A gain wheel or slider on a telephone receiver handset;
> 3. A tactile button to turn on audio equivalents;
> 4. A user preferences dialog that is accessible and directly reachable

> from
> a login screen.
>
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Sean Hayes
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:50 PM
>> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee; Dave Singer; Al
>> Sonnenstrahl; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; Toby R. Silver;
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Tomorrow's conf call
>>
>> Here is the text I was working on, I've attached four
>> examples, if anyone thinks we need more then please suggest them
>>
>>
>> I suggest a modification of the existing provision 1.2 A to
>> allow for the requirement that the means to set up a feature
>> be accessible to the person that needs it, as follows;
>>
>> 1.2-A - Accessibility Configuration
>> In complying with this subpart, each agency must activate
>> accessibility features and configure products so that they
>> are accessible to and usable by people with disabilities. The
>> means to activate the accessibility features and configure
>> products must be accessible, discoverable and usable by those
>> desiring the feature.
>>
>> For example:
>> 1. A caption on/off on a TV remote comparable in prominence
>> to the volume control on that remote; 2. A gain wheel or
>> slider on a telephone receiver handset; 3. A tactile button
>> to turn on audio equivalents; 4. A user preferences dialog
>> that is accessible and directly reachable from a login screen.
>>
>>
>> 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
>> Larry Goldberg
>> Sent: 10 October 2007 16:30
>> To: Dave Singer; TEITAC AV list; Al Sonnenstrahl;
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; Toby R. Silver;
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] Tomorrow's conf call
>>
>> Dave's suggestion regarding a more generic, but strong,
>> requirement for the accessibility and usability of access
>> controls bears serious consideration.
>> Let's do so at today's conference call.
>>
>> ... Larry ...
>>
>>
>> Dave Singer wrote:
>>
>> > At 15:31 -0400 9/10/07, Larry Goldberg wrote:
>> >>
>> >> We will discuss today's Plenary meeting/conference call, suggested
>> >> changes to the enclosed draft, and hopefully come to a conclusion
>> >> regarding the "caption button"/"top-level menu" proposal.
>> >
>> > As worded, I really don't think I can -- or we should -- agree to
>> > these, unless they are restricted to 'classical analog television'.
>> > They are both making into mandates a question of the design of the
>> > system.
>> >
>> > The furthest we should go in this direction is a
>> recommendation. We
>> > simply do not know how to design these products, and inserting a
>> > design mandate may well have a counter-productive effect:
>> > manufacturers who were willing to meet the spirit of the
>> regulations,
>> > and provide accessible equipment, may well not wish to meet
>> the letter
>> > of such a design mandate, and consequently (since they
>> would no longer
>> > be able to claim compliance) do nothing.
>> >
>> > I am also wondering why the people needing captions need to
>> have this
>> > explicit access method, but those (for example) needing audio
>> > description of video are left without even a guideline as to how it
>> > should be enabled?
>> >
>> > Finally, what happens to option (2) when the menus on a system are
>> > enabled some other way than pressing a menu button on a remote?
>> >
>> > So, trying again, I'd like to *broaden* the scope of the *mandate*
>> > while leaving product design only recommended:
>> >
>> > * * * * *
>> >
>> > For all accessibility options, including but not limited to
>> Captions,
>> > and Audio Description of Video [or whatever the term we settled on
>> > is], the enabling and disabling of that accessibility
>> option must also
>> > be readily accessible to those desiring it, meaning that
>> the control
>> > must both be easy to find, and easily used by someone needing it.
>> >
>> > For captions, recommended approaches include:
>> > 1. A caption on/off button on the TV remote control; 2. Caption
>> > control(s) on the first menu that appears when on-screen menus are
>> > displayed;
>>
>>
>> - Larry
>>
>>
>>
>>

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