Thread Subject: FW: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete (Audio Connection Jack)

Return to this mailing list's archives

From: Robert_Nerhood@Dell.com
Date: Thu, Oct 18 2007 3:20 PM
Subject: FW: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete (Audio Connection 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 = >

From: Mike Paciello
Date: Fri, Oct 19 2007 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: 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 = >
>
>
>

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Fri, Oct 19 2007 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: 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 = >
>
>
>

From: Mike Paciello
Date: Fri, Oct 19 2007 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Hardware SC Provisions to Complete(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 = >
>
>
>

From: Robert_Nerhood@Dell.com
Date: Fri, Oct 19 2007 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: 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 = >
>
>
>

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Fri, Oct 19 2007 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: 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 = >
> >
> >
> >