Telecommunications Access Advisory Committee (fwd)

From: David Andrews (dandrews@winternet.com)
Date: Sat Jun 22 1996 - 07:27:46 PDT


This message may be of interest to some. I understand that Tim Cranmer
is our representative on this committee.
 
David Andrews

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 10:08:22 -0400
From: Jim Fruchterman <jim@ARKENSTONE.ORG>
To: Multiple recipients of list EASI <EASI@SJUVM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Subject: Telecommunications Access Advisory Committee

     I mentioned in an earlier message that I was Arkenstone's
     representative on this U.S. federal government advisory committee. I
     received a fair number of questions on this, and so I'm writing this
     to a fair number of access-related lists.

     I'm not known as a spammer, which means I feel that these issues are
     critically important to our community, both inside the U.S. and
     outside. One other note: due to the national blind conventions and
     another trip, I won't be in my office again until July 9th.
     Therefore, while I will be reading all of the responses I receive, I
     will not be very active in the discussion. That's ok, because I'm
     soliciting feedback from the community. Onto answering questions
     raised!

     1. Why am I asking for feedback?

     It's my job as a member of the committee to represent the interests I
     represent, rather than myself personally. There is an affirmative
     obligation to keep the community I represent informed and to solicit
     feedback. I'm not the only representative of this community, but
     along with Gregg Vanderheiden of the TRACE Center, we're the only
     representatives of the adaptive technology developers.

     2. What's a Federal Advisory Committee?

     A group that represents a wide array of interests that is set up to
     advise the government on an important issue. The example I knew about
     best before being appointed to this one was the committee that
     reviewed the Challenger disaster.

     Our meetings are open to the public, so that the public can influence
     our committee.

     3. What's the Telecommunications Access Advisory Committee (TAAC)
     supposed to do?

     We're advising the U.S. Access Board and the Federal Communications
     Commission (FCC) on the accessibility guidelines for
     telecommunications equipment under the new Telecommunications Act of
     1996. We have about six months to deliver our report.

     4. What are the access provisions of the Telecom Act?

     These are quoted from Section 255 of the Telecom Act. "Disability"
     and "readily achievable" use the definitions in the Americans with
     Disability Act (ADA).

     (b) MANUFACTURING - A manufacturer of telecommunications equipment or
     customer premises equipment shall ensure that the equipment is
     designed, developed, and fabricated to be accessible to and usable by
     individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable.

     (c) TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES - A provider of telecommunications
     service shall ensure that the service is accessible to and usable by
     individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable.

     (d) COMPATIBILITY - Whenever the requirements of subsections (b) and
     (c) are not readily achievable, such a manufacturer or provider shall
     ensure that the equipment or service is compatible with existing
     peripheral devices or specialized customer premises equipment commonly
     used by individuals with disabilities to achieve access, if readily
     achievable.

     5. What's the charter of TAAC?

     Make recommendations to the Access Board on:
     (a) types of equipment to be covered by the guidelines;
     (b) barriers to the use of such equipment by persons with disabilities
     affecting hearing, vision, movement, manipulation, speech and
     interpretation of information;
     (c) solutions to such barriers, if known, categorized by disability
     (different solutions may be needed for different disabilities) and
     research on such barriers; and
     (d) contents of the guidelines.

     6. Who's on TAAC?

     There are 35 members. They represent the classic telecom industry and
     their industry organizations (makers of phones and wireless equipment,
     carriers), the organizations representing the disability community (
     ACB, AFB and NFB for the blind, UCP, a handful of deaf and hard of
     hearing organizations, ASHA), research groups such as the TRACE center
     and Gallaudet U., and the adaptive technology field (Arkenstone in the
     vision/LD field).

     7. Does TAAC make laws and/or regulations?

     No, we don't have that power. However, if we make recommendations
     that are the consensus of the committee, there is a good chance that
     the Access Board and the FCC will implement them.

     Now, I'm no longer reporting facts, but expressing opinions in my role
     of representing my community. These opinions are solely mine and are
     not those of the committee.

     8. Who's not on TAAC, who ought to be, IMHO?

     Representatives from the Internet services and products industry and
     the PC industry. Only NCR comes from this industry, and they're
     pretty careful to make it clear they are speaking only for NCR.

     This may be because they think the Telecom Act's accessibility
     provisions don't apply to them. I disagree with them, but they might
     think if they avoid the committee, they have more of a base to object
     later if they don't like our recommendations, than if they were on the
     committee.

     9. Why do I think that PCs and Internet Service Providers should be
     covered by the access provisions?

     Because they are promising telecommunications to their customers. If
     PCs with telecommunications functions weren't covered, the access
     provisions would be useless. The Internet now provides every telecom
     capability (minus some of the access services!) that our "classic"
     telecom system has been providing: telephone service, faxes, answering
     machines, electronic mail and so on.

     10. Why is this important?

     If all products providing telecom were more accessible thanks to these
     guidelines, I think the quality of access could be greatly improved.
     This might spill over into general accessibility of consumer and PC
     equipment (is there a difference?) because it will be hard to remove
     access features from equipment used for more than just telecom.

     If these guidelines applied to equipment in the U.S., the spill over
     would likely benefit people in other countries, since we're one of the
     big markets for telecom equipment (and PCs).

     11. Should we get our hopes up?

     It's pretty early to do so. However, it looks like an opportunity to
     be explored. It can't hurt!

     Remember, "readily achievable" is not a standard that guarantees that
     everything will be done to make access happen. It has to be
     straightforward to make it accessible or compatible with access
     equipment. The best pitch at the first committee meeting was for the
     concept of Universal Design (see http://www.trace.wisc.edu), to design
     products for everyone at the outset. The corollary is that everybody
     benefits from Universal Design, not just the disability community,
     i.e., curbcuts benefit everybody.

     12. What feedback are you looking for?

     What you think the issues are in telecom access for you and/or the
     people you represent? Do you agree/disagree with my comments? What
     should be done to make it more accessible.

     Thank you for your kind attention!

  Jim Fruchterman jim@arkenstone.org
  President Arkenstone, Inc.
  555 Oakmead Parkway 1-800-444-4443
  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA 1-408-245-5900
  "Information Access for Everyone!" Fax: 1-408-328-8484
  http://www.arkenstone.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:04 PST