Thread Subject: Re: Accessibility Definition

Return to this mailing list's archives

From: David Poehlman
Date: Tue, Jun 12 2007 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Definition

I'd say compliance with instead of conformace to and I'm not sure I'd add
the last part about equivelant fascilitation since that seems to in some
ways defeat the purpose of the standards which should be good enough so that
compliance meets the goal of accessability.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Diane Golden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC SubPart A listserv (E-mail)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 5:04 PM
Subject: [teitac-subparta] Accessibility Definition


The following is the current draft of the proposed new definition of
"accessibility" with a note about some dissention. Any further
comments/discussion on this term need to be shared by Friday (June 15) via
listserv and will be synthesized into the draft due June 30.

Thanks,
Diane Golden
NASCIO

ACCESSIBILITY -- (proposed new definition)
ACCESSIBILITY MEANS CONFORMANCE TO ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THIS
STANDARD OR EQUIVALENT FACILITATION PROVIDED THROUGH OTHER METHODS. THE
TERM, ACCESSIBILITY, MAY ALSO BE USED TO DEFINE A BROAD SET OF FEATURES AND
CAPABILITIES WHICH ENABLE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES TO ACCESS ELECTRONIC
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

Some subcommittee members questioned the need for this new definition
dependent on whether or not the term is used in subsequent standards or not.

From: Diane Golden
Date: Mon, Jun 18 2007 1:47 PM
Subject: Accessibility Definition

The following is the current draft of the proposed new definition of
"accessibility" with a note about some dissention. Any further
comments/discussion on this term need to be shared by Friday (June 15) via
listserv and will be synthesized into the draft due June 30.

Thanks,
Diane Golden
NASCIO

ACCESSIBILITY -- (proposed new definition)
ACCESSIBILITY MEANS CONFORMANCE TO ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THIS
STANDARD OR EQUIVALENT FACILITATION PROVIDED THROUGH OTHER METHODS. THE
TERM, ACCESSIBILITY, MAY ALSO BE USED TO DEFINE A BROAD SET OF FEATURES AND
CAPABILITIES WHICH ENABLE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES TO ACCESS ELECTRONIC
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

Some subcommittee members questioned the need for this new definition
dependent on whether or not the term is used in subsequent standards or not.

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Mon, Jun 18 2007 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Definition

I think we should define "accessible features" or other terms used in our
provisions.

I do not think it is good to define accessibility as being 'conforming to
this standard'. There are many who will not be able to access products
that only meet these standards. To call products accessible that can't be
used by large portions of the population of people with disabilities is not
good.

And there doesn't appear to be any need to define it.

Thanks


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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Diane Golden
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 4:05 PM
> To: TEITAC SubPart A listserv (E-mail)
> Subject: [teitac-subparta] Accessibility Definition
>
> The following is the current draft of the proposed new
> definition of "accessibility" with a note about some
> dissention. Any further comments/discussion on this term
> need to be shared by Friday (June 15) via listserv and will
> be synthesized into the draft due June 30.
>
> Thanks,
> Diane Golden
> NASCIO
>
> ACCESSIBILITY -- (proposed new definition) ACCESSIBILITY
> MEANS CONFORMANCE TO ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THIS
> STANDARD OR EQUIVALENT FACILITATION PROVIDED THROUGH OTHER
> METHODS. THE TERM, ACCESSIBILITY, MAY ALSO BE USED TO DEFINE
> A BROAD SET OF FEATURES AND CAPABILITIES WHICH ENABLE PEOPLE
> WITH DISABILITIES TO ACCESS ELECTRONIC INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
>
> Some subcommittee members questioned the need for this new
> definition dependent on whether or not the term is used in
> subsequent standards or not.
>
>

From: Debbie Cook
Date: Mon, Jun 18 2007 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Definition

I believe this could be a definition for something like "compliance with
section 508" but it in no way defines accessibility. I don't believe
anything is gained by trying to further define this.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diane Golden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC SubPart A listserv (E-mail)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:04 PM
Subject: [teitac-subparta] Accessibility Definition


The following is the current draft of the proposed new definition of
"accessibility" with a note about some dissention. Any further
comments/discussion on this term need to be shared by Friday (June 15) via
listserv and will be synthesized into the draft due June 30.

Thanks,
Diane Golden
NASCIO

ACCESSIBILITY -- (proposed new definition)
ACCESSIBILITY MEANS CONFORMANCE TO ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THIS
STANDARD OR EQUIVALENT FACILITATION PROVIDED THROUGH OTHER METHODS. THE
TERM, ACCESSIBILITY, MAY ALSO BE USED TO DEFINE A BROAD SET OF FEATURES AND
CAPABILITIES WHICH ENABLE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES TO ACCESS ELECTRONIC
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

Some subcommittee members questioned the need for this new definition
dependent on whether or not the term is used in subsequent standards or not.

From: Diane Golden
Date: Mon, Jun 18 2007 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Definition

It seems there is more inclincation to NOT include a definition of
"accessibility" given the subcommittee responses so far. That could be
partly because some of the original desire for that definition has now been
taken care of as part of the "comparable access" definition. Just FYI, the
term "accessibility" is NOT used in any current technical or functional
performance standards. Only the terms "accessibility feature" and
"accessibility-related software" are used.

Is there any strong objection to NOT defining the term?

Diane


-----Original Message-----
From: Debbie Cook [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 10:45 AM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Accessibility Definition


I believe this could be a definition for something like "compliance with
section 508" but it in no way defines accessibility. I don't believe
anything is gained by trying to further define this.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diane Golden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC SubPart A listserv (E-mail)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:04 PM
Subject: [teitac-subparta] Accessibility Definition


The following is the current draft of the proposed new definition of
"accessibility" with a note about some dissention. Any further
comments/discussion on this term need to be shared by Friday (June 15) via
listserv and will be synthesized into the draft due June 30.

Thanks,
Diane Golden
NASCIO

ACCESSIBILITY -- (proposed new definition)
ACCESSIBILITY MEANS CONFORMANCE TO ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THIS
STANDARD OR EQUIVALENT FACILITATION PROVIDED THROUGH OTHER METHODS. THE
TERM, ACCESSIBILITY, MAY ALSO BE USED TO DEFINE A BROAD SET OF FEATURES AND
CAPABILITIES WHICH ENABLE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES TO ACCESS ELECTRONIC
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

Some subcommittee members questioned the need for this new definition
dependent on whether or not the term is used in subsequent standards or not.

From: Salaets, Ken
Date: Mon, Jun 18 2007 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Definition

Diane et al., the proposed definition sounds more like it fits the term
"accessible," since it endeavors to describe a condition or current
state. Having said that, however, please count me among those who
question the need for a new definition.

Thanks and regards,

Ken Salaets
I T I

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of David
Poehlman
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:07 PM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] Accessibility Definition

I'd say compliance with instead of conformace to and I'm not sure I'd
add the last part about equivelant fascilitation since that seems to in
some ways defeat the purpose of the standards which should be good
enough so that compliance meets the goal of accessability.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Diane Golden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "TEITAC SubPart A listserv (E-mail)"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 5:04 PM
Subject: [teitac-subparta] Accessibility Definition


The following is the current draft of the proposed new definition of
"accessibility" with a note about some dissention. Any further
comments/discussion on this term need to be shared by Friday (June 15)
via
listserv and will be synthesized into the draft due June 30.

Thanks,
Diane Golden
NASCIO

ACCESSIBILITY -- (proposed new definition)
ACCESSIBILITY MEANS CONFORMANCE TO ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THIS
STANDARD OR EQUIVALENT FACILITATION PROVIDED THROUGH OTHER METHODS. THE
TERM, ACCESSIBILITY, MAY ALSO BE USED TO DEFINE A BROAD SET OF FEATURES
AND
CAPABILITIES WHICH ENABLE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES TO ACCESS ELECTRONIC
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

Some subcommittee members questioned the need for this new definition
dependent on whether or not the term is used in subsequent standards or
not.