Thread Subject: Re: Current meeting 11/06
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: Brett, Thomas F
Date: Mon, Nov 06 2006 4:24 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: None
- Previous message in thread: Diane Golden: "Re: Current meeting 11/06"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
This question is now out of context. I tried to ask it during the discussion in the Telecom meeting but was not able to do so.
Tom Brett
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of Diane Golden
Sent: Mon 11/6/2006 5:33 PM
To: 'TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-telecom] Current meeting 11/06
I'm not sure who you are posing the question to or what "equipped this way" means. I think the uncertainty Paul and I are describing can be summarized by the question -- Are ALL phones supposed to meet (or best meet) the 1194.23 telecom standards?
Diane Golden
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]On Behalf Of Brett, Thomas F
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 1:55 PM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: [teitac-telecom] Current meeting 11/06
I am confused. Are you recommending that every phone come equipped this way?
Tom Brett,
Section 508 Coordinator
US Office of Personnel Management
Rm 6H34A
2026061206 (v)
2026062582 (tty)
Disabled does not mean Unable
<mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: Diane Golden: "Re: Current meeting 11/06"