WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: It's Official - New Sec. 508 is out

for

From: Ryan E. Benson
Date: Feb 20, 2015 4:24PM

>Technically it has been up to whether the Section 508 Coordinator Offices
considered PDFs are considered EIT or not.

Most of the Coordinators I know, believe that PDFs are considered to fall
under 508. The challenge is /how/ to evaluate it. Most acknowledge that if
a PDF is on a website, or distributed electronically, it falls under
1194.41. This says documentation needs to be available in other formats.
Another connection is made is if any of the technically standards
(1194.21-.26) then the functional (1194.31) and the Information,
documentation, and support (1194.41) standards apply by default. By
correlation, if 1194.41 apply then 1194.31 does - which say things have to
work for various types of disabilities and the AT they may use. This is
where the hang up occurs. There is not thing to point to. The web
standards (1194.22) are pointed to from here, but they aren't a clean fit.


--
Ryan E. Benson

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Jon Metz < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> Dona,
>
> Currently Section 508 does not have separate rules for one Electronic and
> Information Technology (EIT) over another. Everything is wrapped within the
> coziness of the same rules. The conversation of whether or not PDF files
> are included in the guidelines should probably best be considered opinions.
> Technically it has been up to whether the Section 508 Coordinator Offices
> considered PDFs are considered EIT or not.
>
> This seems to be fortifying the opinion that PDFs are relatively important
> now. In my opinion, the inclusion of PDF/UA is good news in my opinion,
> because so many agencies use PDFs when delivering content. Perhaps given
> the level of effort required to make things PDF/UA will help dictate what
> becomes a PDF in the first place.
>
> Jon
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Dona Patrick < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > There were discussions earlier in the month about Section 508 not
> including
> > PDF files in the guidelines -- that there were techniques but no
> guidelines
> > in WCAG 2.0.
> >
> > I have been reading through the proposed rule and see that PDF/UA is
> > mentioned a few times. This is good news (right?). I've tried to propose
> to
> > my company that we use PDF/UA as a standard and this would force us to.
> >
> > Or am I reading it wrong?
> >
> > Dona
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Chagnon | PubCom < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > OK, not fully out just yet, but the proposed rule to update the
> standards
> > > was announced just an hour ago.
> > >
> > > To view the details online, visit
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/a
> > > bout-the-ict-refresh/overview-of-the-proposed-rule
> > >
> > > Here's what the US Access Board sent out today.
> > > --Bevi Chagnon
> > >
> > > Begin Quote:
> > >
> > > U.S. Access Board Proposes Updated ICT Accessibility Requirements
> > > The U.S. Access Board has released for public comment a proposed rule
> > > updating accessibility requirements for information and communication
> > > technology (ICT) in the federal sector covered by Section 508 of the
> > > Rehabilitation Act. The rule also would jointly update guidelines for
> > > telecommunications equipment subject to Section 255 of the
> Communications
> > > Act.
> > > "The Board's proposal is responsive to widespread changes and
> innovations
> > > in
> > > the IT and communication industries," states Sachin Dev Pavithran, Vice
> > > Chair of the Access Board. "It is important that the 508 Standards and
> > 255
> > > Guidelines stay abreast of the ever-evolving technologies they cover so
> > > that
> > > accessibility for people with disabilities is properly addressed."
> > > The proposed rule updates various requirements to address fundamental
> > > shifts
> > > and trends in the market, such as the convergence of technologies and
> the
> > > increasingly multi-functional capabilities of products like smart
> phones.
> > > Another key goal of this update is to promote consistency with other
> > > requirements in the U.S. and abroad in order to improve accessibility
> and
> > > to
> > > facilitate compliance. A leading reference, the Web Content
> Accessibility
> > > Guidelines (WCAG), is incorporated into the rule and applied to
> web-based
> > > content as well as to offline documents and software. The Board is
> > > proposing
> > > other revisions that will harmonize the rule with voluntary consensus
> > > standards, including those issued by other countries and international
> > > bodies such as the European Commission due to the global nature of the
> > ICT
> > > market.
> > > The proposed rule specifies the technologies covered and contains
> > > performance-based criteria as well as technical requirements for
> > hardware,
> > > software, and support documentation and services. Access is addressed
> for
> > > all types of disabilities, including those pertaining to vision,
> hearing,
> > > color perception, speech, manual dexterity, reach, and strength. The
> > > proposed rule is based on recommendations from the Board's
> > > Telecommunications and Electronic and Information Technology Advisory
> > > Committee (TEITAC) which comprised a broad cross-section of
> stakeholders
> > > representing industry, disability groups, government agencies, and
> other
> > > countries. It also incorporates public feedback the Board received
> > through
> > > the release of two advance drafts of the rule.
> > > "The significant input the Board has received from stakeholders and
> > > interested parties throughout this process is reflected in the proposed
> > > rule," notes Pavithran. "Such collective feedback is critical to
> getting
> > > things right in the final rule, and it is no different with the current
> > > proposal, which includes a host of questions the Board is posing to the
> > > public to gather additional information on various topics."
> > > Public comments on the rule, as well as on a preliminary assessment of
> > its
> > > estimated costs and benefits, are due in 90 days. The Board also will
> > hold
> > > public hearings on the rule in San Diego on March 5 and in Washington,
> DC
> > > on
> > > March 11. In addition, the Board will conduct a public webinar to
> review
> > > the
> > > proposal on March 31.
> > > Further information on this rulemaking, including a summary of the
> rule,
> > is
> > > available on the Board's website or by contacting Timothy Creagan at
> > (202)
> > > 272-0016 (v), (202) 272-0074 (TTY), or <EMAIL REMOVED> .
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >