essential use case of personlization missed out

Hi Folks

We need to see a single A requirement interoperable symbol set codes for non-verbal people. Products for people who are non vocal often use symbols to help users communicate. These symbols are in fact peoples language and people spend years learning a set of symbols tat can not be used with content that is made for these users but by a different company or indeed talk to other people with the same disability but who have learnt the symbols from a different company. Unfortunately many of these symbols are both subject to copy write and are not interoperable. That means end-users can only use one device, and can not use apps or AT from a different company. An open set of references for symbol codes for these symbol sets however, could be interoperable. That means the end user could use an open source symbol set or buy the symbols and use them across different devices or applications. Symbols could still be proprietary but they would also be interoperable. 

We need to include this as soon as possible. In the mean time people can lose their language for copy write reasons. However with the current personlization proposal it is only in at AAA. It is such a basic infringement on human rights that it needs to be single A (or higher - this is peoples ONLY way to communicate)

We can make a supporting technique to 1.1.3 , but the "or text" clause plus the requirement of 1.1.1 makes it a redundant technique. 

Can we try and find some way to get this in as single A? Technology support includes concept codes or linking to a wordnet concept

Lisa Seeman

LinkedIn, Twitter

Received on Wednesday, 26 July 2017 03:26:23 UTC