Re: Feedback on Web of Things

Hi Scott,

Thank you so much for this review and feedback.

Please find some "devils advocate" responses inline below - but only 
because we have been confronted with this push-back before and need to 
be vigilant. But please feel free to counter-argue!


On 08-Feb-17 14:11, Scott Hollier wrote:
> To Shadi
>
> I'm sending this response via e-mail and cc'ing it to the RQTF list as I have a knack of messing up the formatting of wikis when I try to edit them!  Hope this is okay.
>
> Your document is looking great.  I've been spending some time doing some digging and researching references to see if there's anything else I could add.
>
> In terms of the user case, there are a few additional things that may be worth considering:
>
>
> 1)    Emergency: failure of accessibility on general ICT devices may be an inconvenience, but failure of access to IoT may be hazardous.  For example, failure of web-connected security devices, failure of the ability to call an emergency number, failure of an IoT medical monitor.  A question worth asking is 'if the web fails, what happens and what safeguards are put in place to make sure people with disabilities remain safe if, for example, a home loses power?'  Perhaps some sort of categorisation as to the consequences of a device's importance should be considered and the device contain some safeguards if something goes wrong.

I think the "what if the web fails" is applicable to all users, even 
though people with disabilities may be more reliant on technology.

However, I think that the "failure of an IoT medical monitor" fits in 
the section "Security" in our wiki page. I changed it to "Security and 
Safety", and added the "failure" aspect to the outlines there (so far 
this section focused on security in terms of manipulation only).

I think you also raise here another very important point of emergency 
situations. I think this may relate to quality of service, similar to 
text messages on mobiles which are often the only way for people with 
hearing disabilities to communicate in case of emergency. I think the 
IoT/WoT protocols may need to be aware of QoS requirements for people 
with disabilities. For now, I added another item to this same section:
  - An emergency text message by a deaf person is guaranteed to be delivered

Yet this could also be an entire new category. I seek feedback on this.


> 2)    Multiple interfaces:  Interoperability makes sense, but I also think one of the major benefits to IoT/WoT is that it provides yet another way to provide interaction.  For example, a Deaf person may want to interact with an IoT device using a smartphone app in a visual way while a blind person may prefer to use a digital assistant.  I think there's a risk that whenever solution becomes the 'flavour of the month', e.g. just a digital assistant, other disability groups may miss out if, say, the app solution is dropped because of it.  Multiple ways to interact would address this problem

Does one really need to provide multiple interfaces or multiple modes of 
operation, which could be realized through one or more interfaces? In my 
view, the sections "Interoperability", "Accessibility Support", and 
"Accessibility Guidelines" should address the situation you raise.


> 3)    Physical fall back:  partly related to the first point.  Many parts of the world don't' have stable internet connections or power and if you can't get in or out of your house because the internet is down and your phone can't verify your identify with the lock, or your fridge won't let you open it, there's a problem - it may not be life-threatening like the first point, but IMHO these type of devices should have a physical fallback i.e. can still use a key for a door, can still flick a switch for a light, etc.

As above, I don't see this specific enough to disability, even though 
the technology dependency issue, but happy to be convinced otherwise.


> Also I did a bit of digging to see if there were any good references out there around Intenet of Things and disability.  The short answer is there's not much and what is there is quite limited.  That said, I've included what I could find below.

Excellent, thanks! I also recall seeing an autonomous wheelchair at my 
last visit to MIT - fascinating development in my humble opinion!


Many thanks,
   Shadi


> Hope this helps,
>
> Scott.
>
>
> Reference Type:  Generic
> Record Number: 11
> Year: 2015
> Title: AT&T and Permobil Unveil the Connected Wheelchair Proof of Concept at CTIA
> Companies Develop Innovative Solution to Help Empower People with Disabilities and Improve Quality of Life
> Place Published: Coventry
> Short Title: AT&T and Permobil Unveil the Connected Wheelchair Proof of Concept at CTIA
> Companies Develop Innovative Solution to Help Empower People with Disabilities and Improve Quality of Life
> Abstract:  LAS VEGAS - AT&T* and Permobil have developed a trailblazing proof of concept solution that wirelessly connects wheelchairs to increase user independence and freedom. The connected wheelchair concept uses AT&T's Internet of Things (IoT) technology so that the chair can be easily monitored for comfort, performance, maintenance requirements and location. The companies will unveil the connected wheelchair concept at tomorrow's CTIA Super Mobility 2015, in Las Vegas, NV. "Our 'Guiding Star,' when developing any product, comes directly from company founder, Dr. Per Udden, who has stated that every person with a disability has the right to have his or her handicap compensated as far as possible by aids with the same technical standard as those we all use in our everyday lives," said Olof Hedin, Permobil Chief Information Officer. "Permobil's collaboration with the AT&T Foundry is the epitome of how to bring today's technology into the complex rehabilitation arena to benefit users, clinicians and stakeholders." Since being founded in Sweden in 1967, Permobil has been committed to enhancing the lives of people with physical disabilities. Permobil has since become the global leader in manufacturing power wheelchairs, sold across 40 countries. In 2015 Permobil acquired The ROHO Group, Inc., the global leader in skin protection and positioning solutions for wheelchair users, marking the next important step in Permobil's strategy to become a leading healthcare company, providing innovative advanced rehabilitation solutions for people with disabilities. Focused on the complex rehab segment, every wheelchair is built to order and custom-fit to meet the unique medical needs of each individual. Permobil is headquartered in Timra, Sweden and has approximately 1,000 employees. For more information please visit http://www.permobil.com.

>
>
>
>
>
> [Scott Hollier logo]Dr Scott Hollier
> Digital Access Specialist
> Mobile: +61 (0)430 351 909
> Web: www.hollier.info<http://www.hollier.info>
>
> Technology for everyone
>
> Keep up-to-date with digital access news - e-mail newsletter@hollier.info<mailto:newsletter@hollier.info> with 'subscribe' in the subject line.
>
>

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/

Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Received on Thursday, 9 February 2017 13:04:03 UTC