W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2000

RE: TTY and the phone

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:57:35 -0500 (EST)
To: Cynthia Waddell <cynthia.waddell@psinetcs.com>
cc: David Poehlman <david.h.poehlman@verizon.net>, "R. Neff" <rneff@bbnow.net>, Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0011241256390.24869-100000@tux.w3.org>
As I recall, the thing I usually see in Australia is (Voice/TTY)


On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Cynthia Waddell wrote:

  The US Access Board, in their guidance on compliance with the ADA, recommend
  that the description "TTY" be utilized rather than TDD since it is more
  inclusive of people with speech disabilities.  (TDD refers to "Telephone
  Device for the Deaf"). As a result, the practice in California local govt is
  to say, "For customer orders call 800-123-4567 (V/TTY)."  By using this
  description "(V/TTY)" the deaf community in California would know that both
  oral and deaf customers should call this number.

  Best regards,
  Cynthia Waddell
  Formerly ADA compliance officer for City of San Jose

  At 09:41 PM 2000-11-10 -0600, R. Neff wrote:
  >On the web there is a phone number to place orders but no TTY
  capability is
  >not listed. However, if a person using a TTY device calls, they are
  >automatically forwarded to an operator that will take the order. this
  >operator is not part of the call center but a service offered by the
  >telecommunication carrier.
  >what is the proper way to describe a process without offending
  >for example, would you say. For customer orders call 800-123-4567
  >in the future we will have TTY capability from the call center.
  >thanks, rob neff

  I would give you your choice of how to say it.  Actually, you should
  straight to SHHH and/or other consumer-advocacy groups for advice on
  this as
  well, and not stop with WAI.

  This is a rule that applies to print advertising of the TTY-enabled
  number as well as to advertising this capability on the Web.  And the
  issue is
  what will the TTY-user community recognize, not anything

  The range of options that make logical sense include:

  [Separate entries, because that is what the text telephone (TTY/TDD)


  For orders call 800-xxx-yyyy

  Text telephone (TTY/TDD) users, call this number as well.

  [end example]

  [Integrated listing. -- three examples]

  For orders call 800-xxx-yyyy.  Note: this number will get you to text
  service (TTY/TDD) as well.

  For orders call 800-xxx-yyyy (text telephone (TTY/TDD) users, call

  For orders call 800-xxx-yyyy (TTY OK).

  -- end of examples.

  I lifted the language

  Text telephone (TTY/TDD) users

  out of the telephone book.  This is verbose but probably the phone
  company as
  the omnibus monopoly utility has been under the closest scrutiny and
  to say it clearly.  So how they say it is probably a good way to say

  The word 'enabled' is too geeky.  'TTY-capable is better plain
  English, but
  still on the pointy-headed side of popular argot.  I would like to see
  something very brief like "TTY OK" emerge as the code word for this
  because during the transition, it is going to have to go on _lots_ of
  numbers in print and other text-bearing media.  But that should be
  OK'd by
  consumer representatives adn/or representative consumers before it's


Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
September - November 2000:
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Friday, 24 November 2000 12:57:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:10 UTC