Thread Subject: Clarification on accessible content regardless of medium

Return to this mailing list's archives

From: Jim Tobias
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 1:40 PM
Subject: Clarification on accessible content regardless of medium

Hi All,

In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an item came up
that they would like the Committee to clarify. Many people seem to think
that as long as content is not on the web, such as stored on on a CD or DVD,
or transmitted via email or FTP (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from
508.

Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other media, the staff
would like to see some more explicit language. I think the best place is in
Subpart D, provision 2-D - Accessible Content. It currently reads:

"In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate software in a
manner such that output from the software that is distributed or archived by
the agency is made accessible to people with disabilities."

Mike and I propose amending it to read:

"In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate software in a
manner such that output from the software that is distributed or archived by
the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or transmission, is made
accessible to people with disabilities."

This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.

Thanks.

***
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
+1.732.441.0831 v/tty
+1.908.907.2387 mobile
skype jimtobias

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

I like your new wording but would suggest we remove the word ARCHIVE.

If not distributed - I don't think it needs to be accessible. And there are
a million logs, reports, and other things that are generated by computers
and archived and never looked at. If pulled from archive - then it should
be made accessible. If distributed to people, it should be accessible.
But not if just archived. Nice if it is - but not the place to spend
resources I don't believe since there is so much generated today
automatically.




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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Jim Tobias
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 2:39 PM
> To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> content regardlessof medium
>
> Hi All,
>
> In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an
> item came up that they would like the Committee to clarify.
> Many people seem to think that as long as content is not on
> the web, such as stored on on a CD or DVD, or transmitted via
> email or FTP (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from 508.
>
> Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other
> media, the staff would like to see some more explicit
> language. I think the best place is in Subpart D, provision
> 2-D - Accessible Content. It currently reads:
>
> "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> software in a manner such that output from the software that
> is distributed or archived by the agency is made accessible
> to people with disabilities."
>
> Mike and I propose amending it to read:
>
> "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> software in a manner such that output from the software that
> is distributed or archived by the agency, regardless of the
> medium of storage or transmission, is made accessible to
> people with disabilities."
>
> This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ***
> Jim Tobias
> Inclusive Technologies
> +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> skype jimtobias
>
>

From: Baker, Robert C.
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

Jim's recommendation would incur a very significant scoping concern for federal agencies. While I agree that providing clearer language may be helpful, the recommended language below would be extremely difficult to implement and track. The standards already go way beyond what is required of agencies today. I could not support this recommendation.

Respectfully,
Robert

------------------------------
Robert Baker
Social Security Administration
Section 508 Coordinator
SSA Accessibility Resource Center

Office: 410.966.7602
Email: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

Sent by Blackberry
------------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: 'TEITAC Committee' < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Wed Feb 13 15:38:33 2008
Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

Hi All,

In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an item came up
that they would like the Committee to clarify. Many people seem to think
that as long as content is not on the web, such as stored on on a CD or DVD,
or transmitted via email or FTP (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from
508.

Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other media, the staff
would like to see some more explicit language. I think the best place is in
Subpart D, provision 2-D - Accessible Content. It currently reads:

"In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate software in a
manner such that output from the software that is distributed or archived by
the agency is made accessible to people with disabilities."

Mike and I propose amending it to read:

"In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate software in a
manner such that output from the software that is distributed or archived by
the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or transmission, is made
accessible to people with disabilities."

This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.

Thanks.

***
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
+1.732.441.0831 v/tty
+1.908.907.2387 mobile
skype jimtobias

From: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

This provision is intended, I believe, to answer the question of is
content not transported, or delivered just from a web server, required
to be accessible. My memory is that almost all thought that the content
does need to be accessible. What in this language beyond the archiving
issue, is problematic?

"In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate software in a
manner such that output from the software that is distributed or
archived by the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or
transmission, is made accessible to people with disabilities."

I can live with removal of archiving.

I could also suggest additional notes go with it such as:

Note:
The committee recognizes that interim versions of documents may not meet
this requirement as work groups develop language or content in stages.
However, when content is distributed to an audience that is not
sufficiently small enough so that the authors know the accessibility
needs for each member, then the content must be made accessible.
Basically, when in doubt, make accessible. Additionally, when content
is intended to store a specific visual capture of images for various
purposes, such content is considered accessible as long as it is
accompanied by an alternate text description--which can be accomplished
in several ways, which don't all involve incorporating that description
in to a single file, or file format.





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

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim
Tobias
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:39 PM
To: 'TEITAC Committee'
Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
regardlessof medium

Hi All,

In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an item came
up that they would like the Committee to clarify. Many people seem to
think that as long as content is not on the web, such as stored on on a
CD or DVD, or transmitted via email or FTP (instead of HTTP), it is
somehow exempt from 508.

Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other media, the
staff would like to see some more explicit language. I think the best
place is in Subpart D, provision 2-D - Accessible Content. It currently
reads:

"In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate software in a
manner such that output from the software that is distributed or
archived by the agency is made accessible to people with disabilities."

Mike and I propose amending it to read:

"In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate software in a
manner such that output from the software that is distributed or
archived by the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or
transmission, is made accessible to people with disabilities."

This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.

Thanks.

***
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
+1.732.441.0831 v/tty
+1.908.907.2387 mobile
skype jimtobias

From: Whitney Quesenbery
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

I wonder if this really means "made available in an archive" - such as the
collections of articles many agencies post online. It's not really
"distributed" but can be "pulled"

At 03:56 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

>I like your new wording but would suggest we remove the word ARCHIVE.
>
>If not distributed - I don't think it needs to be accessible. And there are
>a million logs, reports, and other things that are generated by computers
>and archived and never looked at. If pulled from archive - then it should
>be made accessible. If distributed to people, it should be accessible.
>But not if just archived. Nice if it is - but not the place to spend
>resources I don't believe since there is so much generated today
>automatically.
>
>
>
>
>Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
>Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> > Of Jim Tobias
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 2:39 PM
> > To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> > Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> > content regardlessof medium
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an
> > item came up that they would like the Committee to clarify.
> > Many people seem to think that as long as content is not on
> > the web, such as stored on on a CD or DVD, or transmitted via
> > email or FTP (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from 508.
> >
> > Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other
> > media, the staff would like to see some more explicit
> > language. I think the best place is in Subpart D, provision
> > 2-D - Accessible Content. It currently reads:
> >
> > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > software in a manner such that output from the software that
> > is distributed or archived by the agency is made accessible
> > to people with disabilities."
> >
> > Mike and I propose amending it to read:
> >
> > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > software in a manner such that output from the software that
> > is distributed or archived by the agency, regardless of the
> > medium of storage or transmission, is made accessible to
> > people with disabilities."
> >
> > This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > ***
> > Jim Tobias
> > Inclusive Technologies
> > +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> > +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> > skype jimtobias
> >
> >

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

How about changing "archived" to "made available online".




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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Whitney Quesenbery
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:29 PM
> To: TEITAC Committee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> content regardlessof medium
>
> I wonder if this really means "made available in an archive"
> - such as the collections of articles many agencies post
> online. It's not really "distributed" but can be "pulled"
>
> At 03:56 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
> >I like your new wording but would suggest we remove the word ARCHIVE.
> >
> >If not distributed - I don't think it needs to be accessible. And
> >there are a million logs, reports, and other things that are
> generated
> >by computers and archived and never looked at. If pulled
> from archive - then it should
> >be made accessible. If distributed to people, it should be
> accessible.
> >But not if just archived. Nice if it is - but not the
> place to spend
> >resources I don't believe since there is so much generated today
> >automatically.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Gregg
> > -- ------------------------------
> >Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> Behalf Of Jim
> > > Tobias
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 2:39 PM
> > > To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> > > Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
> > > regardlessof medium
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an item
> > > came up that they would like the Committee to clarify.
> > > Many people seem to think that as long as content is not
> on the web,
> > > such as stored on on a CD or DVD, or transmitted via email or FTP
> > > (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from 508.
> > >
> > > Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other
> media, the
> > > staff would like to see some more explicit language. I think the
> > > best place is in Subpart D, provision 2-D - Accessible
> Content. It
> > > currently reads:
> > >
> > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> software
> > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> distributed
> > > or archived by the agency is made accessible to people with
> > > disabilities."
> > >
> > > Mike and I propose amending it to read:
> > >
> > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> software
> > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> distributed
> > > or archived by the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or
> > > transmission, is made accessible to people with disabilities."
> > >
> > > This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > ***
> > > Jim Tobias
> > > Inclusive Technologies
> > > +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> > > +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> > > skype jimtobias
> > >
> > >

From: Whitney Quesenbery
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

Or "made available in an archive" - since "online" would lead us back to
the original problem of thinking this only applied to the web.

And maybe we should say "regardless of medium" or include note that this
includes CD, DVD, etc, in addition to Web.

W

At 04:33 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

>How about changing "archived" to "made available online".
>
>
>
>
>Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
>Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> > Of Whitney Quesenbery
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:29 PM
> > To: TEITAC Committee
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> > content regardlessof medium
> >
> > I wonder if this really means "made available in an archive"
> > - such as the collections of articles many agencies post
> > online. It's not really "distributed" but can be "pulled"
> >
> > At 03:56 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> >
> > >I like your new wording but would suggest we remove the word ARCHIVE.
> > >
> > >If not distributed - I don't think it needs to be accessible. And
> > >there are a million logs, reports, and other things that are
> > generated
> > >by computers and archived and never looked at. If pulled
> > from archive - then it should
> > >be made accessible. If distributed to people, it should be
> > accessible.
> > >But not if just archived. Nice if it is - but not the
> > place to spend
> > >resources I don't believe since there is so much generated today
> > >automatically.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Gregg
> > > -- ------------------------------
> > >Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> > Behalf Of Jim
> > > > Tobias
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 2:39 PM
> > > > To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> > > > Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
> > > > regardlessof medium
> > > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an item
> > > > came up that they would like the Committee to clarify.
> > > > Many people seem to think that as long as content is not
> > on the web,
> > > > such as stored on on a CD or DVD, or transmitted via email or FTP
> > > > (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from 508.
> > > >
> > > > Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other
> > media, the
> > > > staff would like to see some more explicit language. I think the
> > > > best place is in Subpart D, provision 2-D - Accessible
> > Content. It
> > > > currently reads:
> > > >
> > > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > software
> > > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> > distributed
> > > > or archived by the agency is made accessible to people with
> > > > disabilities."
> > > >
> > > > Mike and I propose amending it to read:
> > > >
> > > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > software
> > > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> > distributed
> > > > or archived by the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or
> > > > transmission, is made accessible to people with disabilities."
> > > >
> > > > This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > ***
> > > > Jim Tobias
> > > > Inclusive Technologies
> > > > +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> > > > +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> > > > skype jimtobias
> > > >
> > > >

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible contentregardlessof medium

Good note Allen,

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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Hoffman, Allen
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:20 PM
> To: TEITAC Committee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> contentregardlessof medium
>
> This provision is intended, I believe, to answer the question
> of is content not transported, or delivered just from a web
> server, required to be accessible. My memory is that almost
> all thought that the content does need to be accessible.
> What in this language beyond the archiving issue, is problematic?
>
> "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> software in a manner such that output from the software that
> is distributed or archived by the agency, regardless of the
> medium of storage or transmission, is made accessible to
> people with disabilities."
>
> I can live with removal of archiving.
>
> I could also suggest additional notes go with it such as:
>
> Note:
> The committee recognizes that interim versions of documents
> may not meet this requirement as work groups develop language
> or content in stages.
> However, when content is distributed to an audience that is
> not sufficiently small enough so that the authors know the
> accessibility needs for each member, then the content must be
> made accessible.
> Basically, when in doubt, make accessible. Additionally,
> when content is intended to store a specific visual capture
> of images for various purposes, such content is considered
> accessible as long as it is accompanied by an alternate text
> description--which can be accomplished in several ways, which
> don't all involve incorporating that description in to a
> single file, or file format.
>
>
>
>
>
> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Jim Tobias
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:39 PM
> To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> content regardlessof medium
>
> Hi All,
>
> In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an
> item came up that they would like the Committee to clarify.
> Many people seem to think that as long as content is not on
> the web, such as stored on on a CD or DVD, or transmitted via
> email or FTP (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from 508.
>
> Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other
> media, the staff would like to see some more explicit
> language. I think the best place is in Subpart D, provision
> 2-D - Accessible Content. It currently
> reads:
>
> "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> software in a manner such that output from the software that
> is distributed or archived by the agency is made accessible
> to people with disabilities."
>
> Mike and I propose amending it to read:
>
> "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> software in a manner such that output from the software that
> is distributed or archived by the agency, regardless of the
> medium of storage or transmission, is made accessible to
> people with disabilities."
>
> This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ***
> Jim Tobias
> Inclusive Technologies
> +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> skype jimtobias
>
>

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardlessof medium

That was almost what I was trying to get to.

That this would only apply to things that were
1) sent out to people
2) posted on the Web
3) posted to a server for people to access (does anyone post to any servers
now besides web servers?

What else would we want to cover? (Not people's personal docs. Not things
that are just stored away for archive. )



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


> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:teitac-committee-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Whitney Quesenbery
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:36 PM
> To: TEITAC Committee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
> regardlessof medium
>
> Or "made available in an archive" - since "online" would lead us back to
> the original problem of thinking this only applied to the web.
>
> And maybe we should say "regardless of medium" or include note that this
> includes CD, DVD, etc, in addition to Web.
>
> W
>
> At 04:33 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
> >How about changing "archived" to "made available online".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Gregg
> > -- ------------------------------
> >Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> > > Of Whitney Quesenbery
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:29 PM
> > > To: TEITAC Committee
> > > Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> > > content regardlessof medium
> > >
> > > I wonder if this really means "made available in an archive"
> > > - such as the collections of articles many agencies post
> > > online. It's not really "distributed" but can be "pulled"
> > >
> > > At 03:56 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> > >
> > > >I like your new wording but would suggest we remove the word ARCHIVE.
> > > >
> > > >If not distributed - I don't think it needs to be accessible. And
> > > >there are a million logs, reports, and other things that are
> > > generated
> > > >by computers and archived and never looked at. If pulled
> > > from archive - then it should
> > > >be made accessible. If distributed to people, it should be
> > > accessible.
> > > >But not if just archived. Nice if it is - but not the
> > > place to spend
> > > >resources I don't believe since there is so much generated today
> > > >automatically.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Gregg
> > > > -- ------------------------------
> > > >Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> > > Behalf Of Jim
> > > > > Tobias
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 2:39 PM
> > > > > To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> > > > > Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
> > > > > regardlessof medium
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > >
> > > > > In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an item
> > > > > came up that they would like the Committee to clarify.
> > > > > Many people seem to think that as long as content is not
> > > on the web,
> > > > > such as stored on on a CD or DVD, or transmitted via email or FTP
> > > > > (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from 508.
> > > > >
> > > > > Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other
> > > media, the
> > > > > staff would like to see some more explicit language. I think the
> > > > > best place is in Subpart D, provision 2-D - Accessible
> > > Content. It
> > > > > currently reads:
> > > > >
> > > > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > > software
> > > > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> > > distributed
> > > > > or archived by the agency is made accessible to people with
> > > > > disabilities."
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike and I propose amending it to read:
> > > > >
> > > > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > > software
> > > > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> > > distributed
> > > > > or archived by the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or
> > > > > transmission, is made accessible to people with disabilities."
> > > > >
> > > > > This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > ***
> > > > > Jim Tobias
> > > > > Inclusive Technologies
> > > > > +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> > > > > +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> > > > > skype jimtobias
> > > > >
> > > > >

From: Diane Golden
Date: Wed, Feb 13 2008 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on accessible content regardless of medium

I sent out the original (rather vague) standard language last week to state
govt folks to get feedback before next week's call. All expressed serious
concerns that mirror Robert's about the scope and reach of that language
being problematic -- let alone any suggested revisions.

As the risk of opening up another can of worms, the issue is somewhat
similar to the captioning/video description scoping dilemma. If you require
100% of all content or to be accessible the standard is so high that
conformance becomes unreachable. You run the clear risk of the requirement
being completely disregarded because it is so unattainable. If the standard
is something less than 100%, what is the priority determination? Obviously
content that is publically available should be accessible. Content that is
widely used and content that is used by an unknown audience should be
accessible. But what about a communication from one individual to another?
Or content whose use is limited to a closed set of individuals?

So the concern is not the addition of the phrase "regardless of the medium
of storage or transmission" as the media format should not be a
determinative factor is what content must meet the standard. The concern is
the application scope to 100% of all content and how to identify some level
less than 100% of everything that is reasonable based on the reach of the
content and what is known about the recipients.

Diane

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]On Behalf Of Gregg
Vanderheiden
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:45 PM
To: 'TEITAC Committee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
regardlessof medium


That was almost what I was trying to get to.

That this would only apply to things that were
1) sent out to people
2) posted on the Web
3) posted to a server for people to access (does anyone post to any servers
now besides web servers?

What else would we want to cover? (Not people's personal docs. Not things
that are just stored away for archive. )



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


> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:teitac-committee-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Whitney Quesenbery
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:36 PM
> To: TEITAC Committee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
> regardlessof medium
>
> Or "made available in an archive" - since "online" would lead us back to
> the original problem of thinking this only applied to the web.
>
> And maybe we should say "regardless of medium" or include note that this
> includes CD, DVD, etc, in addition to Web.
>
> W
>
> At 04:33 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
> >How about changing "archived" to "made available online".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Gregg
> > -- ------------------------------
> >Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> > > Of Whitney Quesenbery
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:29 PM
> > > To: TEITAC Committee
> > > Subject: Re: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible
> > > content regardlessof medium
> > >
> > > I wonder if this really means "made available in an archive"
> > > - such as the collections of articles many agencies post
> > > online. It's not really "distributed" but can be "pulled"
> > >
> > > At 03:56 PM 2/13/2008, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> > >
> > > >I like your new wording but would suggest we remove the word ARCHIVE.
> > > >
> > > >If not distributed - I don't think it needs to be accessible. And
> > > >there are a million logs, reports, and other things that are
> > > generated
> > > >by computers and archived and never looked at. If pulled
> > > from archive - then it should
> > > >be made accessible. If distributed to people, it should be
> > > accessible.
> > > >But not if just archived. Nice if it is - but not the
> > > place to spend
> > > >resources I don't believe since there is so much generated today
> > > >automatically.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Gregg
> > > > -- ------------------------------
> > > >Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > > > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> > > Behalf Of Jim
> > > > > Tobias
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 2:39 PM
> > > > > To: 'TEITAC Committee'
> > > > > Subject: [teitac-committee] Clarification on accessible content
> > > > > regardlessof medium
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > >
> > > > > In our discussion this past Monday with the Access Board, an item
> > > > > came up that they would like the Committee to clarify.
> > > > > Many people seem to think that as long as content is not
> > > on the web,
> > > > > such as stored on on a CD or DVD, or transmitted via email or FTP
> > > > > (instead of HTTP), it is somehow exempt from 508.
> > > > >
> > > > > Although our recommendations seem to clearly cover other
> > > media, the
> > > > > staff would like to see some more explicit language. I think the
> > > > > best place is in Subpart D, provision 2-D - Accessible
> > > Content. It
> > > > > currently reads:
> > > > >
> > > > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > > software
> > > > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> > > distributed
> > > > > or archived by the agency is made accessible to people with
> > > > > disabilities."
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike and I propose amending it to read:
> > > > >
> > > > > "In complying with this subpart, each agency must operate
> > > software
> > > > > in a manner such that output from the software that is
> > > distributed
> > > > > or archived by the agency, regardless of the medium of storage or
> > > > > transmission, is made accessible to people with disabilities."
> > > > >
> > > > > This provision is on next Tuesday's agenda.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > ***
> > > > > Jim Tobias
> > > > > Inclusive Technologies
> > > > > +1.732.441.0831 v/tty
> > > > > +1.908.907.2387 mobile
> > > > > skype jimtobias
> > > > >
> > > > >