Thread Subject: "Content" in our subcommittee

Return to this mailing list's archives

From: Jim Tobias
Date: Thu, Oct 26 2006 9:40 AM
Subject: "Content" in our subcommittee

Hi,

The Group B wiki page does a great job of pulling out the provisions in 21
and 22 that address content (rather than navigation or operation). But I'm
not sure if it hits the issue presented to us by the Access Board. If I
remember correctly, they had gotten a lot of questions about whether
documents attached to email, like a Word file with an image, was covered by
508 and if so, did they require some other sort of technical solution.

1. Am I right in stating your concern, Access Board folks?
2. Is Group B on the right track for that concern?

******
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
+1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
skype jimtobias
+1 908.907.2387 mobile

From: Peter Korn
Date: Thu, Oct 26 2006 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: "Content" in our subcommittee

Hi Jim,

My understanding/recollection was that we would first go through the
existing language, and then with the output of that work in hand, tackle
new issues like document content.


Regards,

Peter Korn
Accessibility Architect,
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

> Hi,
>
> The Group B wiki page does a great job of pulling out the provisions in 21
> and 22 that address content (rather than navigation or operation). But I'm
> not sure if it hits the issue presented to us by the Access Board. If I
> remember correctly, they had gotten a lot of questions about whether
> documents attached to email, like a Word file with an image, was covered by
> 508 and if so, did they require some other sort of technical solution.
>
> 1. Am I right in stating your concern, Access Board folks?
> 2. Is Group B on the right track for that concern?
>
> ******
> Jim Tobias
> Inclusive Technologies
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> +1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
> skype jimtobias
> +1 908.907.2387 mobile
>
>

From: Brett, Thomas F
Date: Fri, Oct 27 2006 5:25 AM
Subject: Re: "Content" in our subcommittee

>>If I remember correctly, they had gotten a lot of questions about
whether
>>documents attached to email, like a Word file with an image, was
covered by
>>508 and if so, did they require some other sort of technical solution.

As one of the individuals that has presented this question to the Access
Board, I'd like to say that email is becoming more and more of a vehicle
in which information is gather and information is disseminated. Either
as an attachment or embedded in the email, forms and data are
transmitted thru email systems. People using assistive technology may
not be able to access this information. In addition to Word files,
which are not necessarily accessible, PDF, TIFF, JPG, GIF files are also
transmitted via email.

Tom Brett,
Section 508 Coordinator
US Office of Personnel Management
Rm 6H34A
2026061206 (v)
2026062582 (tty)
Disabled does not mean Unable
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim
Tobias
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 8:15 AM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Cc: 'Baquis David'; 'Creagan Tim'; 'Bailey Bruce'; 'Capozzi David'
Subject: [teitac-websoftware] "Content" in our subcommittee

Hi,

The Group B wiki page does a great job of pulling out the provisions in
21
and 22 that address content (rather than navigation or operation). But
I'm
not sure if it hits the issue presented to us by the Access Board. If I
remember correctly, they had gotten a lot of questions about whether
documents attached to email, like a Word file with an image, was covered
by
508 and if so, did they require some other sort of technical solution.

1. Am I right in stating your concern, Access Board folks?
2. Is Group B on the right track for that concern?

******
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
+1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
skype jimtobias
+1 908.907.2387 mobile

From: Andi Snow-Weaver
Date: Fri, Oct 27 2006 6:15 AM
Subject: Re: "Content" in our subcommittee

Good discussion.

Peter is right. We said we would first review all of the existing
provisions and then tackle content. I expect we will encounter content
issues as we discuss the exisitng software and Web provisions. Tom's
posting had a good summary of e-mail issues. I have started a page on
Content issues so that we can collect these as we go along.

http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:content

Andi

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Tue, Nov 07 2006 7:10 AM
Subject: Re: "Content" in our subcommittee

" Since only procurement violations are subject to enforcement, do people
think that content standards will have any lasting impact? "

In addition the current law does not cover software procured by vendors in
the process delivery E&IT. 508 would have to be changed to cover software
procured by vendors.

Jonathan

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Tue, Nov 07 2006 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: "Content" in our subcommittee

[Jim Thatcher wrote] I think the 508 standards should require software
accessibility and web accessibility (including multimedia) but there is
nothing we can say about accessibility of the content that appears in an
arbitrary "content" creating application.

[my comments] I have to disagree on this. While content itself may not be
accessible when view in an arbitrary client area, I believe the storage
mechanism of the content must provide a way to account for accessibility.
For example, the MS word document format should provide a mechanism that
will allow data and header cell association to be stored for a table.

Jonathan