Dr. Coombs. Hello I am Norman Coombs and I am the CEO of EASI, Equal Access to Software Information. I want to well can you to a special Web cast that we're doing related to the recently released regulations from section 508. This Web cast is being co hosted by my buddy Dick Banks. Hello Dick.

Mr. Banks. Good morning Norm.

Dr. Coombs. And our interviewee is Doug Wakefield.

Mr. Wakefield. Good morning Norm.

Dr. Coombs. From the access board. And he is essentially the person who is the author of the 508 regulations. What kind of weather have you got down there in Washington Doug?

Mr. Wakefield. We are freezing Norman. I expect the phone lines to heat up because the regulations were published this morning. But we are cold.

Dr. Coombs. Okay, it is snowing in Rochester as usual. I suppose it is called up in Menomonie Wisconsin Dick?

Mr. Banks. Only about 50 below with the wind chill factor.

Dr. Coombs. Okay. Well you want to talk about the regulations just issued for section 508. Many of us have been sitting on pins and needles waiting for these to come about. Like everything else in today's world, when you involve yourself in committees and hearings and all of that things take longer than we expect, although this really was not too bad. They were due out in May, and we now have them still in the same calendar year. So they were issued today Doug? Is that it?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes. They have this interesting phrase; the Federal Register puts a new regulation on display for viewing the day before. So it actually became public yesterday afternoon. And this morning it is published in the Federal Register.

Dr. Coombs. So it is public yesterday, and it is published today? Is that it?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes, right.

Dr. Coombs. I noticed in the last day or two that Clinton came out with some regulations related to some medical thing and I am blanking out on what it is. Is Clinton going to make an announcement about this? Or is his office?

Mr. Wakefield. Not at this time. But what came out where some new regulations regarding the security of medical records.

Dr. Coombs. That is what it was?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes.

Dr. Coombs. Okay well, 508 means what?

Mr. Wakefield. Okay, 508 is very broad in that it covers electronic and information technology that is purchased for use by the federal government. And the idea is that it must be accessible, and the data and information produced by the equipment must be accessible to employees with disabilities on a comparable basis to those without. As well as, and this is where the Web comes in so strongly, when the federal government and federal agencies make information available to the public people with disabilities must have equal access to that information.

Dr. Coombs. Okay, let me just nail down a couple of other technicalities. Section 508 is actually a section of the Vocational Rehab Act of 1973?

Mr. Wakefield. That is correct. 508 was originally added in 1986, but there was no enforcement that time. It just said that the Department of Education and the general services administration would establish guidelines that would insure access to information by people with disabilities.

Dr. Coombs. And so this was reauthorized, if my memory is right, starting in 1998?

Mr. Wakefield. 1998.

Dr. Coombs. And then we have been working on the regulations since then?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes, and it has been nonstop. This was something that I was new to as far is actually doing "rulemaking." And I thought 18 months, which is what we were originally given, was certainly a longtime. I've learned since then that when you are working with a variety of groups and trying to come up with something that satisfies everybody, 18 months goes by very fast.

Dr. Coombs. Well tell me Doug, did you come up with something that satisfies everybody?

Mr. Wakefield. No.

Dr. Coombs. That is a big charge.

Mr. Wakefield. I do think, and I will be very honest, I think it is a wonderful good start.

Dr. Coombs. Good.

Mr. Wakefield. 508, the release of these regulations is the beginning, not the end. And we have the authority and the mandate has technology changes to update. So that is my next job within the next month is to start working on the updates.

Dr. Coombs. Wow, the way things change on the Internet; you're going to need to hire several assistants.

Mr. Wakefield. Well we are already pulling together a committee. Because the Web will be the first thing probably that will get updated.

Dr. Coombs. And so they are published today. When today take effect?

Mr. Wakefield. Okay there are two. And this is a tad confusing. And I am glad you ask that because I would like to get it straightened out. There is a technical day to that is called the effective date. And that is the day that it will actually go into the code of federal regulations. It is 60 days after the publication in the Federal Register. And this happens with major rules because it gives Congress a chance, if they wish and we certainly do not expect any problems, but if they wish to review it and say, "Oh my, that is not exactly what we intended." They could call it back. We do not anticipate that.

Dr. Coombs. That goes into the new president and a new Congress then?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes, and I think they're going to be very busy.

Dr. Coombs. Well I suppose we can persuade President-Elect Bush that his daddy put through the ADA, and he wants to come on stream?

Mr. Wakefield. Exactly. And even the ABA, the architectural barriers act, came in under Nixon and 69. So we feel that this is a bipartisan interest. And the enforcement will kick and as of June 21st. That means that products purchased after June 21rst must comply with the regulations.

Dr. Coombs. So that is six months to the day?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes.

Dr. Coombs. Okay so we have got basically two months for Congress to think about it, and six-month for enforcement.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes.

Dr. Coombs. We're going to come back and ask you for another interview down the road, because this is such a large topic. We want to focus today on its impact on Web pages. But it obviously has a lot to do with on-site facilities, computers, software, and those kinds of things. So that we would like to come back and talk you sometime in months from now about that, is that okay?

Mr. Wakefield. Any time.

Dr. Coombs. All right.

Mr. Wakefield. That is fine.

Dr. Coombs. So we want to talk about the Web. Many of us are aware of the fact that the World Wide Web Consortium had established the Web access initiative, a couple of years ago I guess, and that they have some guidelines and some quick tips and other things out there. Can you talk a bit about how the regs compared or contrast with the work that WAI has been doing?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes. And as a matter of fact in the final regulations there is quite an explanation of comparing the two, where we tried to be consistent. We have worked with WAI, having them review our regulations and getting feedback from them. The main difference is that while theirs are guidelines, and an author, a web page author is allowed to pick and choose. It is strongly recommended of course that web page author's goal with the first level of checkpoints, and that they do the second level. And if they really want to do a good job, they go with the third level.

Mr. Banks. Right.

Mr. Wakefield. But they also do have that option. And if they do not do a saying, they still are not going to be legally liable. So our main concern since Web access has been established now in the federal sector as a civil right with legal consequences. For example if you try to access the Web site and you find that they are violating our standards, you can actually go to court and press charges against the agency. And the agency can be ordered to fix it.

Dr. Coombs. You are talking about a federal agency?

Mr. Wakefield. A federal agency yes, very clear. Therefore you have got to have standards, when at all possible, that can be looked at in court. That's why we were unable to use some of the guidelines such as use simple as possible language appropriate to the site. It is a good guideline, but it is very subjective. And if we had used a standard like that, I think I would have quit my job and become a lawyer, because that will make lawyers rich.

Mr. Banks. Well not only that, but there's no way that could be defined.

Mr. Wakefield. Exactly. Or pages shall transform gracefully is another phrase that is coming up in the second reiteration of the. Those are subjective.

Dr. Coombs. Or being easy to navigate was one that also struck me.

Mr. Wakefield. Right. And sort of comparable to this, in our software in our proposed rule, we said that you had to have a logical order. And I struck that after awhile because I realize that is not the order that is important, it is that you can get to them. For example, whether you go back, next, cancel, help. Or next, that, help, cancel, it doesn't really matter what is logical. What's logical to one may not be logical to another. That is a subjective measurement.

Dr. Coombs. Yes.

Mr. Wakefield. And so we have tried and we have not succeeded yet. So we have tried to make the Web standards as measurable as possible. But this is why we need more work.

Mr. Banks. Well in reality to it makes it much easier for authors to become compliant.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes. Because they need, okay what do I do? My ideal, and I do not know if we can reach it or not, but my ideal would be to give Web authors standards they could follow so that they would know they were compliant without having to test with a screen reader. I think that that is a subjective way to evaluate Web accessibility. Because as those of us who use screen readers know, the level of expertise in the use of a screen reader varies tremendously.

Dr. Coombs. Absolutely. And then varies by browser too.

Mr. Wakefield. Exactly. It is hard to imagine an office with developers who have 2020 vision putting the time and being motivated to really learned the fine points out the Window Eyes, Jaws, Windows Bridge, or whatever.

Dr. Coombs. Exactly.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes. So I do not think that is the way to go in the end. I think you need, and we do not have them yet. We have many that will work, but there are some standards such as our standards for farmers for instance. We put farms now in the web page section. And it just as it must be usable with assistive technology. I want that one improved because it is not measurable yet.

Dr. Coombs. Yes.

Mr. Banks. That is not an easy task Doug. I was sitting here thinking about that is not an easy road to hoe.

Dr. Coombs. Well as you know Doug, a lot of us have been sitting on the sidelines yearly trying to guess what was going to happen. And I am not a lawyer. But it occurred to me as I looked at some of the WIA guidelines that as good and useful as they are, they were highly subjective. And I was hoping you would come out with things that were as solid and measurable as possible. That way they would be more likely to be applied and stay out of the courts. Because the only person that wins when you go to court is a lawyer anyhow.

Mr. Wakefield. I agree. I agree.

Dr. Coombs. So I congratulate you for really trying to focus on that. And I think that is really excellent. Now you mentioned, and some of our people may not know about it, the guidelines of the Web access initiative and the recommended levels. Level one is the minimum, level 2 and level 3 are a higher bar to jump over to achieve an even higher level of access.

Mr. Wakefield. Right.

Dr. Coombs. Is it fair to say that the access board pretty much tried to focus on level one from the WIA guidelines?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes to a point. Now let me explain one of the major things that we did with it overall that is different from the proposed rule. And I realize that not everybody has the time or the incentive to the read the proposed rule. But in the proposed rule, and in the recommendations of our advisory committee, the standards have been divided up into general and component specific. And it confused people.

Even WAI, when they commented on our web section, forgot to comment on the general section. Which also apply to the web. We have done to the general section and actually repeated standards. So that if something applied to software and the Web, and a category we called self-contained close systems which is Information kiosks and so on, we repeated those standards rather than letting people try to extrapolate.

In the Web now, beyond what WAI did, if you have a service or an information system that is going to timeout. If you do not do something in a certain amount of time you're going to be disconnected, you now have to at least alert the person and ask them if they want more time. And that is true on Web site. And that is not in level 1 of WAI. We put a specific recommendation, or regulation in about forms that we feel are so important as we move into the whole area of a paperless government.

Dr. Coombs. Yes, purchasing online and that kind of thing too.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes. Now this caused an interesting, very significant change between WAI and us. When we said that you had to indicate when time was going to run out, there is only one way to do that. And that is to download a script or applet to the individual's computer. If we had stayed with the idea that your pages must be usable when script or applets and plug-ins are not supported, then we were going to do a lot. And we just felt that JavaScript is too prevalent to tell web page authors in the federal government you cannot use it.

So what we have done is actually come out with two regulations that I am very pleased with but need work. One of them states that when you use JavaScript, you must use associated text that has a meaning. Whether it is increased quantity for instance, to click on an arrow to raise the number that you're purchasing or something like that. Rather than, as you know with screen readers a lot of times you just get a jumble of letters.

Dr. Coombs. Yes.

Mr. Wakefield. You can use JavaScript, and there are ways to make it accessible. So people who use JavaScript are going to have to start looking at that are ways to label it. And we will be developing technical assistance on what JavaScript features work and which ones do not. There are several different ways to activate menus. And some work and some do not.

Mr. Banks. That would be extremely valuable.

Mr. Wakefield. I think it would be helpful. The other thing we have done is, and it was pointed out, I have got to give credit to Earl Johnson out of Sun Microsystems. He was a tremendous help throughout this process. And he was the one that pointed out that scripts and plug-ins are not the same, as we all know. And while scripts get downloaded from your page, you might have a plug-in like RealAudio or whatever, on your computer and the author really doesn't have any control over what plug-in you are using.

So what we have said is that if you require a plug-in on the users machine to display or render content you must provide a link. Just like people do, you know they say click here to download RealAudio, click here to download Acrobat Reader, or what ever. You must provide a link to a plug-in that meets our software guidelines.

So I put some responsibility on the web page author that if they are going to use say PDF, that they need to make sure that the Acrobat Reader that is coming out actually will make it accessible and provide a link to it. Otherwise they're going to have to use something other than PDF. They can use PDF, but they are going to have to do a text version also.

Dr. Coombs. Now we are having a link next to this presentation of your guidelines. And we will also be putting up a transcription so that people who are deaf can follow it, or anyone who wants to download this discussion and print it off can have that. It is important for people to be aware of that. We have been talking about your relationship with the Web Access Initiative. And where you are able to cooperate, in where you needed to go your own way, although they may end up following you there. We will have to wait and see. Obviously you had discussions with people that make web software like Apache, or certainly with...

Mr. Wakefield. With Oracle.

Dr. Coombs. With Oracle, Microsoft, and you mentioned Sun already. Who is putting out Netscape? AOL I suppose.

Mr. Banks. AOL is.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes, they bought them.

Dr. Coombs. What kind of discussions did you have with the software companies?

Mr. Wakefield. In general I would say that it was very cooperative. Throughout the process we have had a very good relationship getting good feedback from individual companies. Anybody who reads the comments that came in, the public comments, will notice there is a difference between industry associations and the individual companies. The individual companies tend to be very cooperative.

Mr. Wakefield. Right, and I think this is just to be expected.

Dr. Coombs. Yes, that is their job.

Mr. Wakefield. They were professional and did the best they could. But they also worked with us now that they see they are coming through.

Mr. Banks. Well I think that they see some of the companies coming across, and obviously they probably eased up a little.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes.

Dr. Coombs. Well for me I see one of the biggest implications certainly on the Web and certainly when we come back and talk to you about hardware and software, is on the hardware software companies. A lot of them have done very limited work to support people with disabilities because we were such a small market share. But now that they have to meet those standards to sell to the government, the market share suddenly went up. So that my expectation is that these companies are going to be a lot more responsive then they were previously.

Mr. Wakefield. We are seeing that already Norm. I think you probably saw on the list that was it Larry Goldberg of WGBH, forwarded a press release from Macromedia that they were going to start working on Flash to make it accessible. Corral says that they are going to do a better job with keyboard access to the WordPerfect functions, WordPerfect 9 and so on. And of course what happens is as you know, we're not going to see the company say well we will develop one version that it accessible for the government.

Dr. Coombs. Really.

Mr. Wakefield. It is too expensive to have parallel lines.

Dr. Coombs. Do it once and do it right.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes and I think over the years you are going to see a lot of the old problems of access, I think you will see them go away.

Mr. Banks. It almost, we needed the power of 508 to make that happen in my opinion. I do not think it would have happened just because it is the right thing to do. I think money was what really pushed this over the edge. If they are going to do business with the government, they are going to have to pay some attention to accessibility.

Mr. Wakefield. Well I think this is important, and I think you have hit it right on the head to. We were in Sweden in the first week of October, and I talked to several people over there. They were fascinated by our 508 process and the idea that the government was going to make it enforceable. And that people could actually sue if they did not get access. It was just a foreign concept to them.

You know the industry groups are doing their job. The advocacy groups are doing their job. That is the way our system works. And industry's job is to get the government off their back as much as possible. And the advocacy job is to get as good an environment for themselves as possible. And the government has to kind of walk down the middle and bring them both together. And our system works when you say you must. If you saying you should, they may or may not.

Dr. Coombs. The old 508 said that you should and we saw very little impact.

Mr. Wakefield. Exactly. People like to know, in this country anyway, they like to know the limits. And that want to know what is required. And once they are required they go ahead.

Dr. Coombs. I was speaking at a meeting several years ago now and the first question from the audience was what do I have to do not to get sued?

Mr. Wakefield. Right. Yes. That is the thing. You know people ask me, are the agencies in the federal government resisting? No. They are just saying, tell us what to do.

Dr. Coombs. So this is going to apply to all the federal government sites? To the Department of Agriculture, and Labor?

Mr. Wakefield. Social Security, you know you can now get on the Social Security site and say, okay have been working for 25 years. When I retire in 10 years or whatever, what is my income going to be like from Social Security? You can fill out a form and they will send it. All these types of services, VA services, Social Security, IRS.

Dr. Coombs. Okay. So is a big step forward in terms of impact on the industries government purchases from. It is going to make government facilities much more friendly and accessible to the citizen with disabilities. Who else do you think is going to be impacted by this?

Mr. Wakefield. Well, we have got the citizenry. We have got the federal employees of course, which is ironically sort of the original intent of 508. But it has been broadened so that it also includes the general public.

Dr. Coombs. What about state agencies?

Mr. Wakefield. Okay, state agencies are still somewhat unclear. The Department of Education has made a very clear ruling that when a state receives money under that Tech Act that they also must comply with 508 regulations. But it is unclear how much of the state, which of the components of the state that have to comply.

It may sound funny, but how state is a state? In other words, if you are a State University or you receive federal funds. So these sorts of issues will all be clarified by the Department of Education. I am glad to say that our job is producing regulations. Their job is to figure out how it is going to apply to states and locals that receive federal funds.

Dr. Coombs. So it ensures enforceability. We still have to wait to see how much this extends beyond the actual federal government and its immediate agencies?

Mr. Wakefield. Right, at this time it is very clear to say that it applies to federal agencies. Or it applies to contractors providing a service for a federal agency.

Dr. Coombs. Well would that mean if I were a contractor providing a service for a federal agency in giving them bombers from Boeing, that all my Boeing websites have to be accessible?

Mr. Wakefield. No. And that is an interesting.

Dr. Coombs. I did not think so.

Mr. Wakefield. It is an interesting direction, because we did get a lot of quote flak, about a year ago, because somebody at one of the network, not broadcast network but one of the Internet network news tonight things, put out an article that said if he sold to the government then your own websites have to. If you...

Dr. Coombs. It is what you sell to the government that has to be related. So that if I contracted to make a website for the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. Wakefield. It would have to comply.

Dr. Coombs. Right.

Mr. Wakefield. Right.

Dr. Coombs. Okay I think that is clear. My guess would be if I were a head of a state agency and had any concern for my citizens, and my citizens with disabilities, and I were looking for some benchmark to use to try to do something. That taking the one that you established would be the obvious thing to do. So I assume we all expect that a lot of places are going to adopt it even when it may not being strictly required.

Mr. Wakefield. I think so. And the other thing that we have to remember is that the State Assistive Technology Access Coalition, or not assistive, it is State Information Technology Access Coalition. I have learned more acronyms. They have done an awfully good job. This is Diane Golden and so on out of Missouri. And Missouri has a terrific CIO, Chief Information Officer. And some of the states have really done a very good job.

Dr. Coombs. So my guess would be that we will see a lot of states following this. And if I were consulting with colleges, which we often do in EASI, I think I would suggest that it would be wise and prudent to look at those rules and follow them, because they may turn out to be enforceable one day. But even if they do not, it is a good and rational kind of thing to do.

Mr. Wakefield. Right. And remember of course that the quote jury is still out on how justice and the courts are going to apply web accessibility and the ADA.

Dr. Coombs. Yes, so that your guidelines are apt to become cornerstones for a lot of things that are coming down the road.

Mr. Wakefield. Yes, standards, standards.

Mr. Banks. Standards.

Dr. Coombs. Sorry. I am just a layman who does not get my terminology strait.

Mr. Wakefield. Guidelines you do not have to do, standards you do have to.

Dr. Coombs. Well I find this really exciting. As I indicated some time ago, a lot of us have been sitting on pins and needles or chewing our fingernails or whatever waiting for this to come out.

Mr. Wakefield. So were we.

Dr. Coombs. Yes, you probably had ulcers.

Mr. Wakefield. It was sort of like every time I came home my wife said, what is the crisis today?

Mr. Banks. Right.

Dr. Coombs. Well personally Doug, I want to thank you and your committee and all those that worked with you for all the hard work you have done on a project that looks to me to be one of the landmarks of the information age.

Mr. Banks. And the interview Doug was extremely informative. I think people will find it really helpful.

Mr. Wakefield. Good, I hope so.

Dr. Coombs. Okay, we are going to come back after you and talk about what the government has to do on its physical premises when it buys hardware and software.

Mr. Wakefield. Very good. Yes. Including what they have to do when they provide information to the public through informational kiosks.

Dr. Coombs. Aha. That is one of the next waves, isn't it?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes.

Mr. Banks. Thank you a whole lot Doug.

Dr. Coombs. Thank you. Have a Merry Christmas.

Mr. Wakefield. Same to you.

Mr. Banks. Bye Doug.