Thread Subject: Re: Definition Consensus Decision: SimpleTactile Form

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: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Mon, Mar 10 2008 8:55 AM

I don't think this means you may not have to know some
inter-relationships to identify a tactual representation, but it means
that the complexity level can't be very high. Examples of switch
up/down is not the most appealing example for me, as that is quite
specific, e.g. feel the dip-switches and if the two switches on the
right are up, the unit is off, is pretty complicated in my view. I've
done the dip-switch thing often enough to say while doable, its not
something that doesn't require knowledge.

I think what we are really after is that "simple tactile" must be
discernible without use of application of arbitrary independent
meanings. so, for example, if a remote has buttons on it, and they have
tactile shapes, those shapes may be sufficient to identify the buttons,
unless they only had Braille which requires knowledge of Braille. This
is not a perfectly black and white line here.

so, per the keyboard example, it might pass as a common knowledge thing,
but who says what's common?
Really what we need is that tactile indicators are provided for hardware
sufficiently enough for someone without vision to use the device. N now
we've added the requirement that the user also does not need to know
any organized tactile communications mechanism either. As a Braille
reader, I think Braille should be considered sufficient, and am in
support of Braille literacy as a general rule. However, Braille doesn't
fit everywhere, to other forms of tactile communications must be
used--shapes, textures, combinations of shape and texture, which are
intuitive.







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

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andi
Snow-Weaver
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 10:35 AM
To: TEITAC Committee
Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Definition Consensus Decision:
SimpleTactile Form

What about the arrangement of keys on a mobile phone or a QWERTY
keyboard?
I would think these are simple tactile forms but would fail the
definition because they require memorization of the spatial layout.

Andi





"Mike Paciello"

<mpaciello@paciel

logroup.com>
To
Sent by: "'TEITAC Committee'"

teitac-committee-
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
cc
ac.org


Subject
[teitac-committee] Definition

03/09/2008 05:37 Consensus Decision: Simple
Tactile
PM Form





Please respond to

mpaciello@paciell

ogroup.com;

Please respond to

TEITAC Committee

<teitac-committee

@list.teitac.org>









Following is the definition for Simple Tactile Form. If you do not agree
that this definition is acceptable, please reply and state your reason.

Simple Tactile Form

"Tactile form that does not require the memorization of any spatial or
temporal tactile patterns.


Note 1: Simple vibration or switch up/down positions are examples of
non-coded tactile forms.


Note 2: Braille, tactile Morse code, and vibration patterns are examples
of more complex tactile forms that require memorization of non-trivial
spatial and tactile patterns respectively.


Note 3: Different numbers of tactile buzzes, or different frequency
buzzes would be non-trivial patterns, and would not be simple tactile
forms."

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