[gui-talk] urgent: comments on draft standards

Hoffman, Allen Allen.Hoffman at dhs.gov
Fri Jun 18 20:00:05 UTC 2010


For any who wish to comment on the draft standards reference by Curtis:
 
Use subject:
 
[Docket No. 2010-1]
RIN 3014-AA37
 
 
ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments, identified by docket number 2010-1
or RIN number 3014-AA37, by any of the following methods:
*	Federal eRulemaking Portal:  http://www.regulations.gov
<http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#docketDetail?R=ATBCB-2
010-0001> .  Follow the instructions for submitting comments. 
*	E-mail:  ictrule at access-board.gov
<mailto:ictrule at access-board.gov> .  Include docket number 2010-1 or RIN
number 3014-AA37 in the subject line of the message. 
*	Fax:  202-272-0081. 
*	Mail or Hand Delivery/Courier:  Office of Technical and
Informational Services, Access Board, 1331 F Street NW, suite 1000,
Washington, DC  20004-1111. 
All comments received will be posted without change to
http://www.regulations.gov
<http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#docketDetail?R=ATBCB-2
010-0001> , including any personal information provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Tim Creagan, Office of Technical and
Information Services, Access Board, 1331 F Street, NW, suite 1000,
Washington DC 20004-1111. Telephone number: 202-272-0016 (voice);
202-272-0082 (TTY). Electronic mail address: creagan at access-board.gov.
 
I would note that curtis is correct that drive-up and "information only"
kiosks are exempted in this release, and this may hnot be a good idea as
it would take another update to include them later.  However, it does
expand the kiosk coverage greatly.  See question 30 in the Board's
questions regarding this.  The Board's notice is at
 
http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/notice.htm
 
My suggestion regarding providing comments is that for some just
describing the challenges you have encountered may be the best way to
get the point across about the barriers we face, while for others,
providing solid "do this" recommendations specific to the draft language
would be more appropriate.  We don't have to all do everything, and the
more information the Board members have to use when making changes
moving forward, the better.
 
 
 
 
 
Allen Hoffman



More information about the GUI-Talk mailing list