Proposed EITAAC Report Sections 1-4 Draft #2 Based on 2/28/99 Kitchen Sink Draft #1 Changes not made based on early March call, except cutting Section 5 and having the 508 language in it] Jim F. 1. Executive Summary Draft after we're closer on the rest of the report. I believe Larry volunteered to do this, unless the Preamble is separate. 2. Legislative Authority/Background 2.1. Section 508 language Pull in from email or the web: [ We agreed to take the entire text out in our early March call] 2.2. Related legislation & rules (ADA, 255, Part 1193, old 508, ADAAG) Need some discussion of the relationship of these different pieces of law and regulations. 3. Definitions 3.1. Electronic and Information Technology 3.1.1 Preamble: It is understood that Electronics and Information Technology addresses a broader spectrum than Information Technology alone, and includes the full breadth of the information environment of the future. It is understood that the intent of Section 508 was to ensure that government employees and the public have access to the government's information environment as it evolves. It is understood that the information environment that is evolving is something that we only imperfectly understand today but that it will include (but not be restricted to) the acquisition, creation, translation, duplication, manipulation, storage, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of information in a broad range of forms including voice, graphics, text, and data structures of all types both on a real time basis (e.g., conversation, communication, interaction) and delayed presentation basis (e.g. information serving, publishing etc.). It is understood that the definition of "Electronic and Information Technology" in Section 508 was meant to address the future and be broader than but consistent with (completely includes) the definition of "Information Technology" put forth by Clinger Cohen Act of 1996 including the exclusion for national security equipment. 3.1.2 Definition: The term "Electronic and Information Technology" shall mean electronic technology that is used in carrying out information activities, involving any form of information, where: a) "Electronic Technology" includes but is not limited to equipment, hardware, computers, software, firmware and similar procedures, systems, ancillary technologies, technologies which cause content to be active in any way, documentation, services (including support services) and related resources. It includes subsystems, interconnections, and interconnected systems. b) "Information Activities" include, but are not limited to, the creation, translation, duplication, serving, acquisition, manipulation, storage, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information. Information activities include delayed presentation activities such as information servers and messaging systems as well as synchronous, real-time communication activities. c) "Any Form of Information" includes, but is not limited to, voice, graphics, text, dynamic content, and data structures of all types whether they are in electronic, visual, auditory, optical or any other form. [Pulled from January meeting minutes, as written up by Gregg] 3.2. Accessible Need a good definition of accessible. Check out the ADAAG & TAAC definitions. The Part 1193 and other definitions are often self-referencing (accessible for Part 1193 means equipment that complies with 1193). 3.2.1. TAAC definition (edited for EITAAC use): EIT is accessible if a person with a disability can use the EIT to perform the same tasks, access the same information, with the same ease, in the same time and at the same cost as a person using the EIT without a disability. The TAAC definition goes further and states that to be considered accessible the disabled person can use the EIT in its standard manufactured form without having to modify the product or purchase special technologies. 3.2.2. ADAAG definition: complies with the ADAAG requirements, and that the facility can be approached, entered and used by physically handicapped persons. 3.3. Disability. Use the ADA definition? Section 3(2)(A) of the ADA (42 USC 12101(2)(A)). 3.4. Undue burden. What authority should we reference? ADA implementation regulations from the DoJ. §36.104: Undue burden means significant difficulty or expense. In determining whether an action would result in an undue burden, factors to be considered include -- (1) The nature and cost of the action needed under this part; (2) The overall financial resources of the site or sites involved in the action; the number of persons employed at the site; the effect on expenses and resources; legitimate safety requirements that are necessary for safe operation, including crime prevention measures; or the impact otherwise of the action upon the operation of the site; (3) The geographic separateness, and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the site or sites in question to any parent corporation or entity... and more stuff based on the parent corporation (which isn't applicable to the federal government, I think). 3.5. Comparable Access/Ready Access (Pat Beattie's issue) The statute calls for access comparable to that experienced by nondisabled federal employees and members of the public. We need to explain what comparable access is. This could be based on the concept of ready access that Pat Beattie worked on a few years ago. Ready access is when a person with a disability has access to the same or equivalent information (as the nondisabled person), with a similar amount of effort and time. This needs some examples (may be relocated to an appendix): 3.5.1. Access is not comparable if the disabled person depends on human intervention to access the information while the nondisabled person does not require human intervention to access the same information 3.5.2. Access is not comparable if the disabled person is required to buy a product or pay money for access that the nondisabled person does not have to buy an equivalent product or pay money for access. For example, a sighted employee receives a manual for free but the blind employee has to pay for a Braille version. Exception: assistive technology may be required to be purchased by the government to make a piece of EIT accessible 3.5.3. Access is not comparable if there is a significant time delay for the person with a disability. 3.6. Any other terms important enough to define in this section of the main report as opposed to placing it in the glossary? 4. Issues that the committee wants to comment on. This is just a list of issues that have come up that would seem to need to addresses in the report somewhere. 4.1. Standards Refresh Does the Committee want to make some more detailed suggestions to the Access Board on the topic of refreshing the standards, beyond what's in the statute? 4.2. Procurement process There are several points here. The first is explanatory material about our interpretation of the burden in 508, which is on the government directly to require accessibility in procurement and in its provision of information to the public. The second is to make more specific recommendations on how these issues show up in federal procurement. For example, should these be part of the representations and certifications for vendors (I believe this was the section K discussed in the meeting)? Is accessibility supposed to be part of the evaluation criteria for major federal EIT bids (Section M)? My personal opinion is that a short rep and certification clause for Section K will be recommended for all procurements. We should recommend that major EIT procurements make it an explicit part of the evaluation process, as well as explicitly in the specifications (I forget which section this is). There was a discussion on the listserv about using access as either a binary certification (yes/no) or an evaluation criteria in awards. 4.3. Technical guidance Does the Committee want to make more specific recommendations in this area? 4.4. Proportionality This is the issue that Steve Berger has brought up. Does the Committee want to expand on this issue, by discussing how to achieve accessibility at the most reasonable cost? 4.5. Flexibility/least restrictive environment This issue is a bit of a counterweight to proportionality. Several people have brought up the need for more than one solution to access problems. For example, forcing a visually impaired person to use voice output screen access may make them five times less productive. Telling a non-Braille reader that Braille is the only accessibility accommodation for a person with a vision impairment is not a reasonable position. 4.6. Alternative Means 508(a)(1)(B) This is the backup strategy embodied in 508. How does this come into play in real situations for federal employees and the public? 4.7. International issues We've discussed harmonization with international standards bodies, ISO, the European Union. Are we going to get specific here? 4.8. Compliance with standards Do we have recommendations on compliance with standards? The EITAAC had a presentation on this from ANSI. Do we want to recommend a body be established to ensure or measure compliance? Do we have recommendations on what an agency should do if it decides that accessibility is an undue burden? DoJ can't help much on this, according to MaryLou. See Steve Berger's group on an accessibility compliance form, attached as Appendix Z. 4.9. Alternatives to standards mandated requirements What if an agency has something better than what a standard mandates? Can they try out the better thing? How can this sort of thing be drafted to prevent abuse? 4.10. Etc. What other items bear comment? 5. [ In a separate document] 6. Appendices 6.1. Glossary (borrowed from Part 1193, mostly) Alternate formats. Alternate formats may include, but are not limited to, Braille, ASCII text, large print, and audio cassette recording. (HTML?) Alternate modes. Different means of providing information to users of products including product documentation and information about the status or operation of controls. Examples of alternate modes may include, but are not limited to, voice, fax, relay service, TTY, Internet posting, captioning, text- to-speech synthesis, and video description. Compatible. Need a real definition. The TAAC is quite tied to telecommunications. Here's a rewrite to generalize it: Compatible means the EIT can be used with, does not interfere with, and where applicable, can be connected to assistive technology products (hardware and/or software) used by individuals with disabilities to achieve access. Customer premises equipment. Equipment employed on the premises of a person (other than a carrier) to originate, route, or terminate telecommunications. Peripheral devices. Devices employed in connection with electronic equipment and information technology to translate, enhance, or otherwise transform information into a form accessible to individuals with disabilities. Telecommunications. The transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user's choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received. Telecommunications equipment. Equipment, other than customer premises equipment, used by a carrier to provide telecommunications services, and includes software integral to such equipment (including upgrades). Telecommunications service. The offering of telecommunications for a fee directly to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used. TTY. An abbreviation for teletypewriter. Machinery or equipment that employs interactive text based communications through the transmission of coded signals across the standard telephone network. TTYs can include, for example, devices known as TDDs (telecommunication display devices or telecommunication devices for deaf persons) or computers with special modems. TTYs are also called text telephones. Usable. Means that individuals with disabilities have access to the full functionality and documentation for the product, including instructions, product information (including accessible feature information), documentation, and technical support functionally equivalent to that provided to individuals without disabilities. 6.2 Bibliography 6.3 Scenarios 6.4 References IEEE Std 100-1997, The New IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms 5th ed. 6.5 Disability Access Compliance Form Disability Access Compliance Form This form is design to summarize the 508 compliance of a product or contract offering. The contractor should complete the form and present it with the bid package. Additional information on access features that are believed to be new or exemplary may be attached. Supporting documentation for the items summarized on this form should not be submitted with the form, but made available, if requested by the contracting officer. Is this product accessible To an individual who has: Degree of Accessibility Notes & Comments - No Vision Core functionality is accessible. Entire functionality is accessible. Product has new or superior accessibility. Industry standards exist for this category and product type and can be used to support this claim. - Low Vision (no audio) Core functionality is accessible. Entire functionality is accessible. Product has new or superior accessibility. Industry standards exist for this category and product type and can be used to support this claim. - No Hearing Core functionality is accessible. Entire functionality is accessible. Product has new or superior accessibility. Industry standards exist for this category and product type and can be used to support this claim. - Hard of Hearing Core functionality is accessible. Entire functionality is accessible. Product has new or superior accessibility. Industry standards exist for this category and product type and can be used to support this claim. - Manipulation Core functionality is accessible. Entire functionality is accessible. Product has new or superior accessibility. Industry standards exist for this category and product type and can be used to support this claim. - Reach and Strength Core functionality is accessible. Entire functionality is accessible. Product has new or superior accessibility. Industry standards exist for this category and product type and can be used to support this claim. - Cognitive Core functionality is accessible. Entire functionality is accessible. Product has new or superior accessibility. Industry standards exist for this category and product type and can be used to support this claim. Disability Access Compliance Form (Instructions) This form is provided as a means of summarizing a product's accessibility. It should be completed and submitted with the bid package. 1. For each product a division shall be made between the core functionality and entire functionality. Core functionality is the minimum functionality required to operate the product for its primary functions. The entire functionality is the functionality required to operate all of a product's functions and features. 2. The form is to be completed based on an analysis of operational chains for each product. This is done by performing the following analysis: a. A list of all operations required to operate the product is made. Care should be taken to include the activities required to learn how to operate the product and provide regular maintenance. b. The list of operations is then divided into a core list and the entire list. The core list identifies the basic operations necessary to operate the product for its primary mode or purpose. The entire list of operations includes the core list and extends to all features and functions provided with the product. c. For each operation construct operational chains of the steps required to perform each operation. d. a .Analyze each operational chain for each of the areas of limitation. e. If in a given category all of the operational steps can be accomplished then the product may be listed as accessible for that category. If it is not then the box should not be checked. Illustration For a desktop telephone business phone a list of operations might include reading the user documentation, making a call, receiving a call, making a conference call. The first three operations would be listed as core operations and the ability to make a conference call would be included in the extended list. A list of steps is then made for each of these operations. As one example, if the user documentation can be accessed by someone without vision then that operation is accessible. As another example, to make a call the phone must be taken off hook, the dialtone sensed, the number dialed, the call conducted, the call terminated and the phone placed back on-hook. For the no vision category, if all of these steps can be accomplished without vision then that operation is accessible. If all of the core operations are accessible without vision then that box should be checked. The process then repeats itself for the other categories listed. 1. A claim of new or superior accessibility should only be made if the product offers something unique or demonstrably superior for a given class of accessibility, as compared to what is generally available in comparable product offerings on the market. Details and supporting evidence may be provided to amplify such claims. 2. If industry standards exist, which apply to the product type and can be used to objectively substantiate the claim of accessibility these should be cited and used as the basis for the claim. Where they exist, the use of industry standards, which provide an objective basis for making a claim of accessibility, is preferred.