Telecommunications and Electronic and Information Technology Advisory Committee (TEITAC)
Meeting Summary

TEITAC 10
January 7–9, 2008
National Science Foundation Arlington, VA

Monday, January 7, 2008, 9:00 a.m.  to 6:00 p.m.  [Day 1 of 3]

Review of agenda / Consensus Protocol Review / Review Process / Completion & Delivery Plan
Michael Paciello and Jim Tobias, Co-Chairs, TEITAC, reviewed the agenda [See: http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/agenda_2008-01-03.htm].  The draft agenda submitted before the meeting was amended to reflect Committee priorities.  [See: http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/agenda_2007-11-13.htm].
There was a discussion about the expectations and protocol to be followed during this face to face meeting with regard to identifying committee members on the conference bridge who needed to be recognized, to speak to an issue.
The January 2, 2008 meeting minutes from the teleconference were reviewed.  It was noted that most definitions discussed during the call had now been consensed.
Committee Consensus Review:  General Exceptions
Fundamental Alteration – discussion was deferred to allow more time to discuss Service areas.
Service Areas – extensive discussion was held, then continued to another day.
Narrow, Delineated Use – this was not addressed today, due to lack of time.
Committee Consensus Review:
The Telecommunications Task Force began a discussion on 255/508 issues as they relate to Subpart A: Application and other portions of the report (Task Force)
Discussion was led by Judy Brewer (W3C) and Ellen Blackler (ATT)
Public Comment Period
no public comments were received, so discussion continued on the 255/508 issues as they relate to Subpart A.
Lunch (provided for Committee Members)
Committee Consensus Review
The discussion by the Telecommunications Task Force continued to discuss Subpart A: Application.
A brief break was held from 4:00 to 4:15 p.m.  , then discussion commenced on:
Committee Consensus Review:  Discussion lead by Andi Snow-Weaver, IBM
Subpart C (User Interface & Electronic Content) [See: http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/teitac8th/snow-weaver.htm]
3.I Pausing – consensus was achieved.
3.K Consistent Identification – referred to the Editorial Working Group (EWG) for refining of the language.
3.L Audio Turnoff – discussion was deferred for another day due to lack of time.
3.M Reading Sequence – consensus was achieved.
3.N Link Purpose – consensus was achieved.
3.Q Disruption of Access Features – was deferred to allow ATIA to review the language.
3.R Timing – referred to the Editorial Working Group (EWG) for refining of the language.
1.2C Pass-Through – consensed as amended.
Public Comment Period
Ileana Martinez from NIST, DOC, spoke about the meanings of the metadata terms in the draft, specifically the words “General Conformity” and “Expert Evaluation” and what they mean in standards work.  This was done to clarify the terms for the benefit of the committee members.
Terry Weaver, GSA, reminded members not to combine the terms “Undue Burden” and “Fundamental Alteration”.  The latter references the product and whether or not it has been altered.  The former is the standard required under §508.  She also discussed how testability of products is handled for government procurements.
Alex Li, SAP, suggested language to add to 3R Timing.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

All changes were made to the Wiki:  http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_Jan_7

Tuesday, January 8, 2008 9:00 a.m.  to 6:00 p.m.  [Day 2]

Review of agenda
Michael Paciello, Jim Tobias, Co-Chairs, TEITAC, reviewed the agenda.  The members of the committee elected to amend the schedule to devote the entire morning to discussing Functional Performance Criteria (FPC).  Updated agenda. 
Talking points for discussion were prepared and submitted by Gregg Vanderheiden, Trace: Functional Performance Criteria, issues and recommendations (prepared by Gregg Vanderheiden, Trace Center).
A brief break was held in the morning, during the FPC discussion.
At noon, a public comment period was held.
Public Comment – Terry Weaver of GSA, noted that the FPC discussion was helpful, since it was emphasizing to her how the FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulations) need to be modernized to reflect current technology and practices.
TJ Cannady, IRS, discussed how the IRS uses FPC for procurements.
Lunch was provided for the committee members
After lunch, discussion resumed on the Subpart B: Functional Performance Criteria.  After extensive discussion lasting all morning, the committee members formed a task force to work on proposed language for the FPC to present to the committee at a later date.  Discussion on the FPC ended around 2:00 p.m.
Discussion then commenced on:
Subpart C (User Interface & Electronic Content)
3.O Information and Relationships- edits were suggested; provision was tabled for further review.  3.P User Interface Components – discussion was continued to another time.
Committee Consensus Review:
Subpart C (User Interface & Electronic Content)
3.T Focus Indicator – consensus was achieved after discussion.
3.U AT Interoperability – consensus was achieved after discussion.
Committee Consensus Review:
Subpart C (User Interface & Electronic Content)
3.V Accessibility Services
3.W Multiple Ways – consensus was achieved after discussion.
3.X Labels or Instructions – consensus was achieved after discussion.
3.Y On Focus – consensus was achieved after discussion.
3.Z On Input – consensus was achieved after discussion.
3.AA Error Identification – after edits, an advisory note and discussion, consensus was achieved.
3.BB Label Descriptive – the committee will work to harmonize this with WCAG, so discussion was tabled to allow checking with WCAG language
A brief break was held.
Committee Consensus Review:  discussion resumed on the following provisions:
Subpart C (General Technical Requirements)
1.2-C Pass Through – consensus was achieved after discussion and amendment.
1.2-D Audio Information – consensus was achieved after discussion.
1.2-E Visual Information – discussion was deferred
1.2-G Text Size – discussion was deferred
Public Comment Period
Peter Manyin, Federal Reserve, commented on provisions 3.Z Input and 3.W Multiple Ways.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. 

All changes were made to the Wiki:  http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_Jan_7

Wednesday, January 9, 2008 9:00 a.m.  to 6:00 p.m.  [Day 3]

Review of agenda / Approval of December Minutes
Michael Paciello, Jim Tobias, Co-Chairs, TEITAC
The committee minutes were approved as originally submitted [1, 2, 3]) for the TEITAC #8, November 13-16, 2007 [November face-to-face] and TEITAC #9 teleconferences November 27, December 4th, 11th and 18th [through December] and TEITAC #10A January 2, 2008 [in January].
Access Board staff Timothy Creagan introduced two new public members of the Access Board to the committee, Mr.  Ronald Gardner and Mr.  Neil Melick.
Proposed meeting dates of either April 3rd or April 4th were given to the committee as dates on which the committee could present their final report of recommendations to the Access Board.  After discussion, the committee agreed to present the report to the Access Board on Thursday, April 3, 2008.
The committee then resumed the discussion on FPC which had commenced the previous day.
A break was held during the course of the morning.
A brief discussion was held on AT-IT interoperability issues.
Before lunch, a public comment period was offered.
Public Comment – No public comments were received.
Lunch was held for the committee members
After lunch, there was discussion on the definition of Functional Equivalent to TV closed captions.
Then there was discussion on having a “Notes” section in the Final Report which would contain notes for the Access Board for suggested actions.  The matter was continued for further discussion at a later date.
Discussion then commenced on:  Subpart C (Authoring Tools)
7.A Accessible Output – no consensus was reached.
7.C Prompts – no consensus was reached.
7.D Accessible Templates – no consensus was reached.
7.E Advisory Notes – no consensus was reached.
A short Break was held during the afternoon
The committee then reconsidered various task group items (items farmed out to small groups during this meeting)
Subpart C (Hardware Aspects of Products)
2.1.D Touch Operated – consensus achieved.
2.2.B Interference with Hearing Device – consensus achieved as amended.
Committee Consensus Review:  Subpart C (Audio and/or Video Content)
5.C Interactive Elements – consensus was achieved.
Subpart C (Additional Provisions for Real-Time Voice)
6.D Caller and Status Information – the provision was deferred, as no consensus was reached.
1194.5 Equivalent Facilitation – consensus was achieved.
1194.3 Service Areas – discussed, but no consensus reached.
Planning for plenary calls and other action items.
There was a brief discussion of upcoming deadlines in the committee process.  It was noted that the committee will hold weekly Tuesday afternoon teleconference meetings for the next two and a half months until the report is due.  More information will be provided as it becomes available.
Public Comment Period – no public comments were offered
The meeting then adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
All changes were made to the Wiki:  http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_Jan_7

The TEITAC referenced three documents during the course of this meeting.  They are:

  1. January 7, 2008 EWB Draft of TEITAC report, “Subpart A and Technical Provisions” (found here: http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_Jan_7)
  2. Status Spreadsheet [see: https://www.google.com/accounts/ServiceLogin?service=wise&passive=true&nui=1&continue=http%3A%2F%2Fspreadsheets.google.com%2Fccc%3Fkey%3DpgEwRrGX9djbhoVCB3N8SXA%26hl%3Den_US&followup=http%3A%2F%2Fspreadsheets.google.com%2Fccc%3Fkey%3DpgEwRrGX9djbhoVCB3N8SXA%26hl%3Den_US]
  3. Report from TEITAC Task Force on 255/508 Differences [see: http://teitac.org/wiki/Task253_report]