Monday 10-1-2007 General telecon

Minutes from Monday 10-1-2007 General telecon

Gregg Vanderheiden (Trace) * Jim Tobias * Michele Budris, Sun Microsystems * tom brett * Robert Baker, SSA * Deb: ADA & IT centers * Mike Fratkin * Jim Elekes (Access Board) * Shannon Rapuano - IBM * Terry Weaver (GSA)

AGENDA

1. Confirm minutes of Last meeting
   • ACTION: APPROVED
2. Confirm this Agenda
3. Functional Performance Criteria -- COMMENTS BELOW
4. No Ability to Reach or Touch Product -- NOT DISCUSSED.

RESOLUTIONS FROM MEETING

1. add a ROLE "To help identify and report functions (of a partially conforming product) that would not meet the FPC (and would therefore not work with employees and/or public users with disabilities) so that agency can evaluate the importance of lack of access to those functions to the intended use of product.
2. to use "access to all functionality of the product"

2) The term full access vs comparable access vs access vs use

1. concern that full access
   • meant access to every single feature/interface of the product (vs every single function).
     • E.g. cant access toolbar feature but can do functions from menus
   • interpreted to mean that everything worked with AT. What if it doesn't work with AT.
2. concern that comparable access meant that people with disabilities needed to be as efficient.
3. concern that access could be interpreted as some access

Solution proposals

1. How about "full access to functionality of the product".
   • This would address the "all features/interfaces" issue
     • Requires access to functionality but doesn't require access to all different ways of doing it.

Discussion points

1. not likely to see products that meet "full access to functions"
   • (products also not likely to pass all technical provisions either"
2. is purpose of FPC is not pass/pail but - what does or doesnt meet this. That is a means to report what aspects would not be useable by people with different disabilities. ???
   • is this another ROLE of FPC? "To help identify and report those aspects/functions of a product that partially meets so that agency knows which functions do not meet the FPC, and would therefore not be available to their employees (or public users) with disabilities. The agency can then evaluate the relative importance of those functions to the agency's and consumers' .

RESOLUTION

RESOLVED AT 10-1-07 MEETING

1. add a ROLE "To help identify and report functions (of a partially conforming product) that would not meet the FPC (and would therefore not work with employees and/or public users with disabilities) so that agency can evaluate the importance of lack of access to those functions to the intended use of product.
2. to use "access to all functionality of the product"

.

3) IS AT REQUIRED? WHAT IF AT DOESNT WORK WITH IT? HOW TO DEAL WITH TESTABILITY IF AT IS INVOLVED ?

FOCUSING QUESTIONS

1. Should a product pass 508 that isn't accessible directly and doesn't work with any AT? (e.g. API but no AT)
2. Should a product work with all AT?
3. Should 508 regs make any statement about which or how many AT?
4. Should a product fail if some features don't work with some AT?
   • what if most but not all features work -- bug in AT prevents the rest.
   • what if it worked fully and then AT changed (bug fix or new version) and no longer works.
   • what if it works with one AT and not another

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

Possibly use notes or build into provision text to say:

• not all AT
• which AT or how many is beyond scope of the 508 standard itself
• must be some AT