[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- To: section 508 discussion list <sec508@trace.wisc.edu>
- Subject: Re: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- From: David Poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 09:45:49 -0400
- In-reply-to: <01f601c6aa59$9d32ef10$6601a8c0@velo>
- List-archive: <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailarchive/sec508/>
- References: <01f601c6aa59$9d32ef10$6601a8c0@velo>
- Sender: sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu
Maryland State Non Visual Access has a similar provision drawn from 508 standareds. While this could be interesting to study for web implementation, it could also be implemented in such a way as to lock out the use oof brefreshable braille displays for interacting with content and ui.
On Jul 18, 2006, at 7:02 AM, Jim Tobias wrote:
Right, .31 always applies. One of the flaws of the VPAT process is that it
ignores .31, which has caused many to forget about them completely. Of
course, a common reply to .31 is that "if the rest of the Standards had been
written properly you wouldn't need .31"
***********
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
tobias@inclusive.com
+732.441.0831 v/tty
www.inclusive.com
-----Original Message----- From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 12:58 AM To: sec508@trace.wisc.edu Subject: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply? This question came up a lot early on but both the original 508 standard and the subsequent guides are pretty clear that .31 provisions apply to all products and product functions. After the technical specifications are applied the .31 provisions are used to make sure the product as a whole is accessible. The .31 provisions are sort of the uber provisions. In fact, .31 can even trump the technical guidelines in a way. The standard allows for equivalent facilitation. That is, you can meet the guidelines in a manner different than the technical specifications if it provides the same functionality as the technical specifications. When you do this, you use .31 to test whether your equivalent facilitation really provides access. (see below) Here are a few places form the 508 standard and the Access Board Guides that give examples of .31 applying to all products - and to being the test you pass after meeting the technical specifications:From the pre-amble of the 508 standards themselves:"1194.2 Application. This section specifies what electronic and information technology is covered by the standards. Electronic and information technology covered by section 508 must comply with each of the relevant sections of this part. For example, a computer and its software programs would be required to comply with §1194.26, Desktop and portable computers, §1194.21, Software applications and operating systems, and the functional performance criteria in §1194.31. Paragraph (a) states the general statutory requirement for electronic and information technology that must comply with the standards unless doing so would result in an undue burden. The term "undue burden" is defined at §1194.4 (Definitions) and is discussed in the preamble under that section." Also from the 508 Standards preamble: § 1194.31 Functional performance criteria. "This section provides functional performance criteria for overall product evaluation and for technologies or components for which there is no specific requirement under other sections. These criteria are also intended to ensure that the individual accessible components work together to create an accessible product. This section requires that all product functions, including operation and information retrieval, be operable through at least one mode addressed in each of the following paragraphs." Again from 508 standard's preamble 1194.5 Equivalent facilitation. This section allows the use of designs or technologies as alternatives to those prescribed in this part provided that they result in substantially equivalent or greater access to and use of a product for people with disabilities. This provision is not a "waiver" or "variance" from the requirement to provide accessibility, but a recognition that future technologies may be developed, or existing technologies could be used in a particular way, that could provide the same functional access in ways not envisioned by these standards. In evaluating whether a technology results in "substantially equivalent or greater access," it is the functional outcome, not the form, which is important. For example, an information kiosk which is not accessible to a person who is blind might be made accessible by having a telephone handset that connects to a computer that responds to touch-tone commands and delivers the same information audibly. In addition, voice recognition and activation are progressing rapidly so that voice input soon may become a reasonable substitute for some or all keyboard input functions. For example, already some telephones can be dialed by voice. In effect, compliance with the performance criteria of §1194.31 is the test for equivalent facilitation.From the Access Boards TELECOM DESIGN GUIDE" However, since all devices need to meet 1194.31, the performance criteria, .... Also from TELECOM DESIGN GUIDE 1. A typical desktop telephone with answering machine is clearly covered by section 1194.23 because its primary function is to provide telecommunications functionality. All parts of 1194.23 apply to this product, as do all parts of 1194.31. Provisions from other technical sections of 508 may also apply based on the telephone design and features. 2. A second example is a self-contained, stand-alone FAX machine without the capability to make a voice call (i.e., the unit has no handset or microphone for a voice call.). However, the unit has a speaker to enable the user to hear the line status. This unit is both a self contained, closed product and a telecommunications product. From Subpart B and C of the 508 standards, 1194.23, 1194.25, and 1194.31 apply. A third example is an "All-in-One" machine connected to a personal computer that includes a FAX, scanner, printer, and copier. This product does not support voice calls. The product includes software to be loaded on the personal computer. Therefore, this software must meet the requirements for software (1194.21). The unit itself is similar to the one in the second example and is covered under the telecommunications products (1194.23) and self contained, closed products (1194.25) provisions, as well as the 1194.31 functional performance criteria. Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b _______________________________________________ SEC508 mailing list SEC508@trace.wisc.edu http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508
_______________________________________________ SEC508 mailing list SEC508@trace.wisc.edu http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- From: David Poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
- Re: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- References:
- RE: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- From: "Jim Tobias" <tobias@inclusive.com>
- RE: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- Prev by Date: RE: [SEC508] Can AJAX find harmony on agency Web sites?
- Next by Date: RE: [SEC508] Can AJAX find harmony on agency Web sites?
- Previous by thread: RE: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- Next by thread: Re: [SEC508] Does .31 always apply?
- Index(es):