RE: Jan 29 minutes

Interesting approach John, 

Let's put that on the docket for next week when we pick up again on this
checkpoint. 

 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: John M Slatin [mailto:john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu] 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 10:29 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden; caldwell@trace.wisc.edu; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Jan 29 minutes

Thanks, Gregg.

I understand the logic and agree that we shouldn't get into the
differing legal situations in different countries. I think I would then
propose that we strike the references to competitive gaming and
time-based testing from the following item:

"*        the time limit is part of a activity where timing is an
essential part of the activity (for example competitive gaming or time
based testing) and  time limits cannot be extended further without
invalidating the activity;"

I propose the following wording instead:

*        the time limit is part of an activity where timing is an
essential part of the activity and
time limits cannot be extended further without invalidating the
activity;"

- I think we can leave the reference to "rules of competition" in the
actual guideline (and note that testing is often competitive in any
case, in the US and elsewhere).

John


"Good design is accessible design." 
Please note our new name and URL!
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/


 



-----Original Message-----
From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 10:01 am
To: John M Slatin; caldwell@trace.wisc.edu; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Jan 29 minutes


Hi John,

We decided to take the 'legally required lengthening" out of our
guidelines since it differs from country to country,  because we
shouldn't be enforcing laws or requiring compliance with laws (and so
shouldn't mention laws in the normative doc).

This was a long discussion but this is what we thought was where we
should be.

Your thoughts?

(for level 3 - when we get to it -- we were talking about having no time
limits. )  but for level 1 we didn't think we could be that restrictive.

 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of John M Slatin
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 9:45 AM
To: caldwell@trace.wisc.edu; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Jan 29 minutes


Thanks, Ben. Sounds like y'all got lots done after I signed off-- I
should do that more often:-)

I'm still concerned about our treatment of time-based testing.  At least
in the United States, some students with disabilities are legally
entitled to extend the time-limits to which students without
disabilities are subject.  For example, a student with a learning
disability might be legally entitled to 1.5 hours for a test that
classmates must complete in one hour or less.  It seems to me that there
has to be provision for *someone* to make that allowance-- if not the
student, then the instructor.

Course management systems like Blackboard and WebCT automatically pull
student data from the registrar's databases, and I had thought that the
registrar's database could be made to include data on students'
disabilities and the accommodations to which they are legally entitled.
However, I was told that there are legal barriers (in the US) to doing
this-- apprently disability status is one type of personal data that
cannot be shared among different units on campus.

Since this sort of time-limit on testing can't be automatically adjusted
for individuals, it seems that we need to pull time-based testing out as
a separate situation.

John


"Good design is accessible design." 
Please note our new name and URL!
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/


 



-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Ben Caldwell
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 9:02 am
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Jan 29 minutes



Just posted yesterday's minutes. Thanks to Loretta for volunteering to
take notes.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2004/01/29-minutes.html

--
Ben Caldwell | <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu>
Trace Research and Development Center <http://trace.wisc.edu>

Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 11:59:30 UTC