Thread Subject: Re: FW: FW: Hardware SCProvisionstoComplete(AudioConnection Jack)

From: Marlaina Lieberg
Date: Sat, Oct 20 2007 3:30 PM

• 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: FW: FW: Hardware SCProvisionstoComplete(AudioConnection Jack)"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

Got it Greg, thank you very much for the explanation. I am mostly quietly
reading and attending, for hundreds of hours have gone before me with all
the Committee's very hard work; that one thing just popped out at me, and
now I understand. Thank you again!

Marlaina Lieberg
American Council of the Blind
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "'TEITAC Committee'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] FW: FW: Hardware
SCProvisionstoComplete(AudioConnection Jack)


Hi Marlaina,

They must have either
- one of those jacks
- or some other connection method for connecting audio (it can be standard
or proprietary, it can be wired or wireless ) as long as that connection
method has an adapter available to one of those standard jacks.

This allows people with hearing impairments to be able to connect special
devices or cables that connect the devices to their hearing aids.

Since everyone used products with those jacks (headset and earphones) - it
is likely that adapters already exist.

This is the most flexible way to allow companies to create product that can
still be used with assistive listening devices.


Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Marlaina Lieberg
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 5:19 PM
> To: TEITAC Committee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] FW: FW: Hardware
> SCProvisionstoComplete(AudioConnection Jack)
>
> Hello.
>
> I am admittedly joining this effort toward its conclusion,
> but am confused by this language. are you saying that
> personal private products must provide a wired or wireless
> connection containing 2.5 mm or 3.5 mm phone jacks as well?
> I'm a bit confused about the meaning intended.
>
> Marlaina Lieberg
> american Council of the Blind
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 1:07 PM
> Subject: [teitac-committee] FW: FW: Hardware SC
> ProvisionstoComplete(AudioConnection Jack)
>
>
> Clarified with Gregg, the following language is what is being
> recommended for consideration by TEITAC
>
> 2.1-C When products provide auditory output beyond simple
> tonal feedback or signaling, the audio signal must be
> provided through an industry standard connection that will
> allow for private listening.
>
> * Public-shared products must provide the connection via a
> standard 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack or RCA audio jack.
>
> * Personal-private products must provide either a 2.5mm or
> 3.5mm phone jack or a wired or wireless connection that has a
> 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack adapter that is commonly available.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:21 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; 'TEITAC Committee'; Nerhood,
> Robert; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: RE: [teitac-committee] FW: Hardware SC Provisions
> toComplete(AudioConnection Jack)
>
> I'm sorry
>
> This is being advanced as a recommendation from the Hardware
> committee and
> had input from closed committee as well. I'm not sure why
> it should be
> changed this radically without review by either committee?
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Mike
> > Paciello
> > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:28 AM
> > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ;
> > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] FW: Hardware SC Provisions
> > toComplete(AudioConnection Jack)
> >
> > Agreed. Brenda?
> >
> >
> > Mike Paciello
> > Cell: +1.603.566.7713
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:26 PM
> > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ;
> > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > Subject: RE: [teitac-committee] FW: Hardware SC Provisions to
> > Complete(AudioConnection Jack)
> >
> > Since the original proposal was worked out between Mike &
> Brenda, I'd
> > like to have Brenda's feedback on these changes.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Mike
> > Paciello
> > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:07 AM
> > To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] FW: Hardware SC Provisions to
> > Complete(AudioConnection Jack)
> >
> > This works for me...
> >
> > - Mike
> >
> >
> > Mike Paciello
> > Cell: +1.603.566.7713
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Gregg
> > Vanderheiden
> > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:04 AM
> > To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] FW: Hardware SC Provisions
> to Complete
> > (AudioConnection Jack)
> >
> > Hi Rob.
> >
> > This language inadvertently changes the provision from being a
> > requirement for a standard connector to being a requirement for a
> > signal level only.
> > It
> > also loses the standard connector for public systems that closed
> > products needs.
> >
> > Actually, we don't need to put the 'standard signal level'
> > part in there I don't believe. It is so common for each connector
> > type that specifying the connector will automatically lead
> to a proper
> > signal level.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > How about the following that combines various suggestions
> on the list
> > and from EWG.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2.1-C When products provide auditory output beyond simple tonal
> > feedback or signaling, the audio signal must be provided through an
> > industry standard connection that will allow for private listening.
> >
> > * Public-shared products must provide the connection via a
> > standard 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack or RCA audio jack.
> >
> > * Personal-private products must provide either a 2.5mm
> or 3.5mm
> > phone jack or a wired or wireless connection that has a
> 2.5mm or 3.5mm
> > phone jack adapter that is commonly available.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Are we meeting tomorrow?
> >
> > Gregg
> > -- ------------------------------
> > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto:teitac-committee- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> > > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:14 PM
> > > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > Subject: [teitac-committee] FW: Hardware SC Provisions to
> Complete
> > > (AudioConnection Jack)
> > >
> > > Here is a recommended revision to 2.2-c.
> > >
> > > "When products provide auditory output beyond simple tonal
> > feedback or
> >
> > > signaling, the audio signal must be provided at a signal
> level that
> > > allows for private listening through an industry standard
> > connection."
> > >
> > > Hardware SC is fine with this and moving to full committee.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mike Paciello [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:10 PM
> > > To: Nerhood, Robert
> > > Subject: FW: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete (Audio Connection
> > > Jack)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike Paciello
> > > Cell: +1.603.566.7713
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 11:59 PM
> > > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > Subject: Re: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete (Audio Connection
> > > Jack)
> > >
> > > Wow. You are nothing if not tenacious. I think your new wording is
> > good.
> > > Otherwise I bekieve there will be questions as to what
> the standard
> > > signal is Thanks very much Brenda Sent from my Verizon Wireless
> > > BlackBerry
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: "Mike Paciello" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > >
> > > Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:38:18
> > > To:"Brenda Battat" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > Cc:"TEITAC
> > > desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee"
> > > < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > > Subject: RE: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete (Audio Connection
> > > Jack)
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Brenda -
> > >
> > > Well it took me a little while, but I finally figured out
> where the
> > phrase,
> > > "standard signal level" came from! It was based on a
> recommendation
> > > from Paul Schomburg on September 24th. Please note his
> email thread
> > > posted to this listserv at:
> > > http://teitac.org/mailarchives/mail_thread.php?thread=1571#post1
> > > <http://teitac.org/mailarchives/mail_thread.php?thread=1571#post1>
> > >
> > > We've adjusted Paul's wording in the 2.2-C Audio Connection
> > provision
> > > a bit, but to quote Paul, he stated the following:
> > >
> > > "...I think standard 'RCA' audio outputs provide sufficient
> > > connections to enable headphone connections. Since these
> > connections
> > > are available on almost every kind of consumer electronics A/V
> > > entertainment product I do not feel a requirement to have
> a 2.5 mm
> > > jack is necessary. I'd suggest the following wording:
> > >
> > > 'Products designed to be used in public places must provide the
> > > connection via an industry standard 2.5mm or 3.5mm audio
> > jack at the
> > > standard signal levels used for headphones/headsets or
> > provide a RCA
> > > audio output for connection to a 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack
> > adapter.' "
> > >
> > > However, this still leaves us with the action item of
> > better defining
> > > "standard signal level". My hope is that either Paul or Gregg V.,
> > > might be able to shed some light on this topic. I've spent
> > close to a
> > > week searching a number of specifictations and archives and
> > I've yet
> > > to find anything that defines a "standard audio signal".
> > >
> > > I wonder if the answer is to adjust the wording as follows:
> > >
> > > "When products provide auditory output beyond simple tonal
> > feedback or
> >
> > > signaling, the audio signal must be provided at a signal
> level that
> > > allows for private listening through an industry standard
> > connection."
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > - Mike
> > >
> > > Mike Paciello
> > > Cell: +1.603.566.7713
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------
> > > From: Brenda Battat [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> > > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 3:04 PM
> > > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > Cc: Randy Marsden; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > Subject: RE: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete (Audio Connection
> > > Jack)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > Jack size is fine as it covers jacks for headphones and
> > jack for cell
> > > phones. And RJ9 adapters are available for someone requesting an
> > > in-line amplifier through Sec 504
> > >
> > > I seem to remember some discussion about clarifying that it was
> > > located in a public place and used by the public
> > >
> > > What is the standard signal level?
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------
> > > From: Mike Paciello [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> > > Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 7:21 AM
> > > To: Brenda Battat
> > > Cc: 'Randy Marsden'; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; Paciello, Mike
> > > Subject: FW: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete (Audio Connection
> > > Jack)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Brenda -
> > >
> > > Randy Mardsen, Rob Nerhood and I are trying to close the
> > loop on the
> > > hardware provisions. We're down to two or three small edits. One
> > > involves the Audio Connection provision. At our September TEITAC
> > > meetings we were discussing the size of the connector jack.
> > >
> > > The current provision with notes is as follows:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2.2-C - Audio Connection
> > >
> > > When products provide auditory output beyond simple tonal
> > feedback or
> > > signaling, the audio signal must be provided at a standard signal
> > > level through an industry standard connection that will allow for
> > > private listening.
> > >
> > > * If the product is a public-shared product then the
> > connection must
> > > be via a standard 2.5mm or 3.5mm audio jack.
> > >
> > >
> > > * If the product is personal-private product then the
> > connection can
> > > be wired or wireless as long as a 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack
> > adapter is
> >
> > > available from the manufacturer.
> > >
> > > Alternate wording for clarity
> > >
> > > * Public-shared products must provide the connection via
> a standard
> > > 2.5mm or 3.5mm audio jack.
> > >
> > >
> > > * Personal-private products may provide either a wired or
> wireless
> > > connection. A wired connection must be via a standard 2.5mm
> > or 3.5mm
> > > audio jack. A wireless connection may be used as long as
> a 2.5mm or
> > > 3.5mm phone jack adapter is available from the manufacturer.
> > > Discussion on Work in Progress: * Need to be more specific about
> > > "standard signal level" * Need to check against the
> definitions for
> > > public-shared and personal-private to be sure they work for this
> > > provision (or define the distinction here).
> > >
> >
> ======================================================================
> > > ====
> > > ==
> > > =
> > > >From what I can see, it appears that we have agreed to alternate
> > > >wording
> > > for
> > > clarity. That seems fine. We simply need to confirm the jack size
> > > specifications. We also need to clarify "standard signal level".
> > >
> > > - Mike
> > >
> > > Mike Paciello
> > > Cell: +1.603.566.7713
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------
> > > From: Randy Marsden [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> > > Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 2:28 AM
> > > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > Cc: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > Subject: Re: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Guys:
> > >
> > >
> > > My apologies for being MIA - I have a lot going on in
> Madentec right
> > now.
> > > I
> > > believe Audio Connection is mine. I think we had it near
> > completion at
> >
> > > the last TEITAC, but there were some questions about the
> size of the
> > jacks.
> > > The
> > > TEITAC member representing the deaf community (sorry, I forgot her
> > > name) was going to connect with me with advice on that. I haven't
> > > closed that loop yet. Mike - do you know her name and
> contact info?
> > >
> > >
> > > -Randy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 12, 2007, at 6:16 PM, Mike Paciello wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Rob -
> > >
> > > No problem. I'm looking at the spreadsheet as my guide. So
> > thanks for
> > > the quick update. I talked to TelComm today and they
> > acknowledged 2.25
> >
> > > is theirs. I saw the traffic on contrast, so let's be sure
> > we get that
> >
> > > one closed out on Tuesday. Freestanding -- yes, your
> > correct. I just
> > > checked my notes. Touch operated, I'll check with Debbie Cook too.
> > > Let's add Audio Connection to Tuesday's discussion as well.
> > >
> > > - Mike
> > >
> > > Mike Paciello
> > > Cell: +1.603.566.7713
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > ]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 7:27 PM
> > > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > ;
> >
> > > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > > Subject: RE: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike,
> > >
> > > Sorry been out of office all day. Here's my understanding.
> > >
> > >
> > > A) Contrast Ratio (values-only) for 2.1.A - being worked on - see
> > > teitac listserv traffic
> > > B) Touch Operated - 2.1.B - No update - I thought
> > self-contained was
> > > tackling this one. Randy?
> > > C) Interfearance with Hearing Aids - 2.2.B (with Telcom) - Purely
> > > telecom
> > > D) Audio Connection - 2.2.C - oops
> > > E) FreeStanding definition. - I thought we agreed at last
> > plenary that
> >
> > > since this is undefined in ADAAG then it remains undefined in 508.
> > > Sorry if I'm mistaken.
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rob
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------
> > > From: Mike Paciello [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > ]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 2:10 PM
> > > To: Nerhood, Robert; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > > Cc: Paciello, Mike
> > > Subject: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Rob/Randy -
> > >
> > > Here are the provisions we still need to get done:
> > >
> > > A) Contrast Ratio (values-only) for 2.1.A
> > > B) Touch Operated - 2.1.B
> > > C) Interfearance with Hearing Aids - 2.2.B (with Telcom)
> > > D) Audio Connection - 2.2.C
> > > E) FreeStanding definition.
> > > I believe that the brief discussion I saw involving Rob's
> > > clarification around luminosity contrast (2.1.B) get's us
> to a 'go'
> > > state. We need to get a little clarity on the notes (per Gregg's
> > > comments). Any chance of being able to bring these all to
> > discussion
> > > during the Tuesday conference call?
> > > What can I do to help?
> > >
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike Paciello
> > > Founder & Principal, TPG
> > > Tel: +1 603.882.4122 ext 103
> > > Cell: +1 603.566.7713
> > > e-mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > > web: www.paciellogroup.com <http://www.paciellogroup.com/>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Randy Marsden
> > > President, Madentec Limited
> > > Tel: 780-450-8926 Ext. 223
> > > Fax: 780-988-6182
> > > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > >
> > >
> > >

• Next message in Thread: None
• Previous message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: FW: FW: Hardware SCProvisionstoComplete(AudioConnection Jack)"