Home → Accessibility → Information Technology IT Accessibility Committee (ITAC) → Meeting Notes → May 19, 2003
May 19, 2003
Date: May 19, 2003
Consolidated Notes from Jean and Kathy
Attending: Carolyn, Gil, Pauline, Floyd, Jean, Jan, Kathy
Eric Dibner attended as an interested person
Kathy conducted the meeting in Val's absence and Jean helped with notes.
1. Update on Intern and her work plan.
Group reviewed Mary's brief summary of new intern, Anna Flewelling. Question was raised wondering what Anna's specific work will involve. We reviewed the original work plan, which covers 12 weeks. It was remarked that after orientation and increased familiarity with the intended job it is likely that the pursuing weeks' work will become more detailed and defined. We reviewed previous meeting conversations where we had agreed that critical agencies will be targeted, that the Intern will be supervised by Mary and will report to the IT Accessibility Committee.
Floyd expressed concern that there is much more work to do relating not only to web content but also to data applications and programs.
2. Final discussion/comments on proposed web policy revision.
The group had another chance to review. There were only a few comments from several members: it was more in depth, had a good introduction and more usable information, why and how section very comprehensive; also that it was technically "over the head" of one member.
Kathy asked if comments mentioned at the April meeting had been incorporated into the final document. The group did not know so Kathy will check with Mary. She will also send information from the ITTATC on various web repair products. The Committee voted to accept the revised web policy with changes suggested at the April meeting. Floyd indicated that the policy is reviewed and/or revised periodically.
The next step is implementation. We need to inform the ISMG of the revisions and presentation to the ISPB needs to be made. We need to clarify if the presentation is for information only or if we need approval from the ISPB. Several committee members wondered if the ISPB still meets. It was suggested that the Committee have an implementation plan worked out as a companion document to the policy prior to the presentations. Need to discuss approach at our next meeting.
Description of whom and what the ISMG and ISPB are were reviewed for new members.
3. Update from the Telecommunications Sub-committee
Jan provided an overview of sub committee activities to date: A teleconference was held with a representative from NexTalk (a potential product that provides access to phone systems by people using TTYs). Also the Sate of Illinois who has been using the product since last August was asked about their set up and experience. The sub-committee has numerous questions that still need to be answered. A group of 10 to 12 have volunteered to participate in a demonstration of the product's use and features.
The original timeline for completion of the demo has been extended by one month. A full report should be available at the next meeting.
Jan also discussed closed captioning issues related to emergencies and updated the Committee on a Study Bill currently tabled. It is hoped that an Executive Order may replace the Bill.
4. Comments on Proposed Accessibility Definition related to RFPs and contracts
Floyd gave an overview of the sub committee's progress to date.
Delores was working on language for RFPs and has sent it to Mary.
Work continues on a draft that explains accessibility and why it is important in an easily understandable way for people (such as many vendors) who are unfamiliar with disability. Such a document would accompany RFPs and contracts and is meant to address the current problem of vendors checking off the product meeting the access standards without understanding what that actually means.
Floyd indicated that the ideal would be in-person presentations to bidders.
At present there is no timeline for completion of these documents.
There was a technical discussion on whether TAMS was usable without a mouse. The answer is yes.
5. Discussion of proposed new meeting schedule.
Committee members acknowledged that the number of sub committee meetings taking place between full Committee meetings has increased and such a change might make sense. However members offered consistent views but offered various reasons for keeping the present schedule for the time being.
a. The new intern is scheduled to report to the Committee in June and her work will just be getting underway.
b. We have new Commissioners and we need to keep visible.
c. We are experimenting this year by functioning with a Chair and should give it one full year to determine effectiveness.
d. The Committee's work plan targets review of this year's work and preparation of next year's work during the summer.
The Committee recommended to keep full Committee meetings each month for now and discuss changing to every two months as part of our annual planning process this summer.
Jan mentioned that the Division of Deafness' new web site was up and requested feedback from the Committee. Check www.maine.gov/rehab/dod
Members did not recall getting the April Committee meeting minutes. We need to check with Mary.
Agenda for June16 meeting
1. Review Membership sub-committee report (Mary had sent it out after other sub committees' reports and we did not review at our April meeting.)
2. Introduction of and Update from Anna Flewelling, our Intern
3. Discussion of approach to be used to orient ISPB to the Committee and it's work and also to review the revised web policy
4. Discuss strategy for developing an implementation plan for the revised web policy
5. Report on the telecommunications demo (Jan will be on vacation but will arrange for others do the report>)
6. Review timeline for our annual work plan.