Dr. Coombs. Hi everyone this is Norman Coombs from EASI, Equal Access to Software and Information, here in sunny California with my buddy Dick. Hello Dick.

Mr. Banks. Hi Norm. Hi everybody. Doug, how are you?

Mr. Wakefield. I am fine Dick and Norm.

Dr. Coombs. Yes we are back with Doug Wakefield now with the Access Board and the primary mover and shaker with the 508, section 508 regulations. We had a good chat with Doug recently, and have it up on the Web, about 508 and its impact on Web pages. So we want to talk about the rest of 508. How much of 508 deals with the Web, and how much does it deal with other things Doug?

Mr. Wakefield. Okay, thank you Norm. I hope you're enjoying sunny California because we are in cold, damp Virginia here. But this is a very interesting perspective that people have had about 508. I would say, not only since the rule was published on December 21rst, but actually throughout its development, the majority of questions we have received for assistance and so on have been about the Web.

However 508 really is much broader. And my opinion is that some of these sections or people who are employed are more important than the Web section. The Web section is there because the rule states that when the government provides information to the public that that information must be in an accessible format.

The main thrust, or the other half, but certainly the main thrust of five away is to provide employees of the government Equal Access to information, data, and technology. So besides the Web we have standards for software, quite a large group. We have a whole section on telecommunications, because telephones, telecommunications, voicemail, all of that is considered as electronic information technology.

We have a section on multimedia productions such as they it saves for training and so on. And we have a nice little category that I could not come up with a better name for, and everybody says what does that mean? And they always get it right. And that is self-contained stand-alone pieces of equipment. Which means information transaction machines, or point-of-sale, ATM tight machines, kiosks in other words.

And then we also have a section on hardware itself. That is the PC. Because there are some specific issues that we wanted to address with the computer that sits on just about every federal workers task. So as you can see while there is one section on the Web, there are five sections that address other issues.

Dr. Coombs. Now if I remember the old 508 essentially dealt with things like computers and primarily guidelines, and not very effective. So this builds on that part of the old 508?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes, definitely. Because when the old 508 was put in place, there really wasn't much of a Web presence. So the old 508 was dealing with information technology that was primarily in the office.

Dr. Coombs. Okay so if the government is going to buy a new computer, does it have to buy one with screen enlargement and a speech synthesizer on it? Or what do they have to do?

Mr. Wakefield. No they do not have to buy one with a screen enlarger, just like it does not have to buy software that is ' self voicing '. But it does have to buy products that if they can be made to work with adaptive equipment, will work with adaptive equipment; they have to be compatible.

For instance, under desktop computers. They do not need to have a built-in voice synthesizer, but we have some regulations that say what the keyboards should be like and the controls. We talk about the fact that if a computer does use a touch screen and we address this in other areas to, you also must provide some alternate mold that lets you use a keypad.

We talk about a problem that many of us have seen. And that is if their products use proprietary plugs and you cannot plug in a normal serial adapter or even a normal monitor you can run into problems.

So what we say here is that if you are providing say an RS232 plug, you can do any proprietary shape or size you want as long as you also provide one that means the industry standard of the RS232 25 pin port.

Dr. Coombs. Does this have any impact as to whether a person in the government buying a desktop get something that is running UNIX or Windows or Mac?

Mr. Wakefield. Okay, that is a slightly other issue. And it is a very good one. It is one that is that some of the manufacturers concerned. Obviously the majority of the standards tend to go towards the Windows operating system because just about tend to on that is by far what is used in the workplace, and certainly in the government.

If somebody is using UNIX or they are using a Mac, then you have to look at the software guidelines and look at how can that system be made compatible. And this is going to be a challenge because there are what maybe one? What is it called? Imac Speak, I cannot think of it right now.

Mr. Banks. Right.

Mr. Wakefield. There is one screen reader that works with some of the UNIX programs. And I don't know that that works with X-Windows, you know the graphical interface that runs on UNIX. That was a project, do you remember I believe her name was Beth Minet down at Georgia Tech. She did a lot of work on trying to make X-Windows more compatible or more accessible.

What is going to happen here is let's say I am a chief information officer at a large department here in the government. And I decide that everybody in my agency, all fifty thousand or what ever, are going to use a UNIX-based system. And they are going to have UNIX systems on their desks.

Well if I do that, I have to take either of several approaches. First of all I could say there is not any accessibility that exists. And therefore I am going to go ahead because of the fact that the UNIX system will do something that nothing else will do. And this is the only thing in the world that my agency can use.

Or they can say, we really want to but since it is not accessible, in order to make it accessible we have to invest some money in a side contract or get the vendor to do it, to actually develop some accessibility. So I see in a case like this where somebody demands that they're going to use one of these alternative operating system from the more popular 95, 98, 2000, millennium, what ever. That they are going to have to also look at evening encouraging or putting some money on to develop the access for it if they think it is that important.

Mr. Banks. Well playing the devils advocate Doug if push came to shove, how stiff do you think the law is going to be if such a case happens? Where someone dug their feet in and insisted on using Linux, or UNIX, and it happens that someone was employed. And software or what ever could not be developed or what ever. Where is that going to lead?

Mr. Wakefield. That will eventually I would imagine lead to, if the agency is of any size, it will lead to some type of a class action on the part of a whole group of employees to rectify this situation. We actually have a situation.

Probably I know of one or two agencies, and I'll bet this is going to come up more, where I think they call it a thin client. Where you have your nice big supercomputer in the basement so to say, and everybody is using just a terminal that is connected to the box. I mean we are kind of going backwards, back to the dumb terminals.

Mr. Banks. Right.

Mr. Wakefield. Except that this time what is happening is you're getting nice screens. Because the only thing that happens on the users terminal is a bitmap image of whatever the text or anything is. It is just pixels; it is just a picture. All the information is resident down in the basement so to say. This is doable, as far as making it accessible. But people are going to have to put some money into it.

I apologize upfront; I always get his name wrong. But I think it is Jeff Whit. He used to be with Microsoft, is now got his own company called Stone Soup.

Dr. Coombs. (Inaudible)

Mr. Wakefield. Okay, he is in Oregon. And I met him a year or so ago at CSUN. And I felt very positive that they might be on the track of developing something that could work with these type of systems. Also I believe it is Dolphin that has a server side application that you can get access at your own terminal even though you do not have computing capability at your terminal.

Of course somebody said, what does that mean? Do you have to have a 500-foot earphone jack? I do not know yet. But these are problems that fortunately the upside is, and I do not mean to be terribly polyanderich, but really 508 is going to make people stop and think before they proceed down this road and say is it really worth it?

And generally it is not. Generally nobody wants the hassle of legal action. And in all honesty, we have found that government agencies would much rather do it right than risk all the legal hassles.

Dr. Coombs. You mentioned telecommunications. And it makes me wonder, are there special new things here that would impact deaf people?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes there are a couple of things that would Impact anybody with a hearing difficulty. Of course, not under telecommunications, but under the web and multimedia we definitely are requiring, not suggesting but requiring, captioning on any production. Whether it is a multimedia production on the web, or a multimedia production that is on a videotape or training.

For telecommunications there is a whole section, because telecommunications are considered part of information or electronic information technology. And basically it is very similar to what the board did for the telecom access guidelines. The only difference is that in 508 there is a much higher pain threshold. And there are actual enforcement provisions.

There are such things as, if you have a TTY, or if you have a voicemail system, and a menu system, in your agency that gives out information. You have to provide TTY access to that type of system so somebody can call, and with a TTY, get the same sort of auto response.

Dr. Coombs. Does that exist anywhere else?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes, it definitely does. Sort of an interesting side story. I went off on a different tangent and ran a small travel agency business. And I was told that I could do a lot of work with people who have to use TTY because most travel agents will not use a relay service, and they won't use TTY. It is too slow.

So I got a TTY. And I had a lot of fun testing it around the government and calling up the TTY response boards at say commerce, or different places. Labor has a job related one. And just getting used to using the TTY myself by practicing on these boards. As well as, of course, in our office and several offices you do have a TTY type-answering machine. Instead of answering with voice, it answers with a TTY signal. So it is there.

Dr. Coombs. As for the requirement of captioning, do you think there are anywhere near enough companies out there ready to pick up the slack and actually produce it?

Mr. Wakefield. On captioning? Yes. Of course we are all familiar with the WGBH Captioning Center, who really got the whole ball rolling decades ago. But when we were doing some research for instance on the cost of having something captioned, we found that right here in Washington D.C. there were several production houses that new how to caption. And they would take a half-hour film for instance, and for $250 or $300 you could get it captioned.

The opposite side of that, or I do not know if you want to say opposite, but the parallel really is we also are following the recommendations of our advisory committee. We are requiring that when the tape or production is for training or what we would call "carrying out the mission of the agency" In other words not frivolous, but a serious production.

And I say that because we are not requiring somebody who throws together a video for a going away party for instance, to be captioned. If they have got somebody in the office that needs it it might be nice to do it. But we cannot make that a...

Mr. Banks. Mandate.

Mr. Wakefield. Mandate yes thanks you. When it comes to production that serve the agency's mission such as training or informational tapes, we are requiring that it being not only captioned but it is also to have voice description, you know DBS.

Dr. Coombs. Right.

Mr. Wakefield. And that is where I think, for awhile, is going to be commercially unavailable or it is going to be an undue burden. Because I like the $300 to caption, we have that prices of $4000 or $5000 to audio describe a half-hour tape. And that makes quite a difference in your production.

Dr. Coombs. It sure does. Now you mentioned touchscreens, kiosks, and things of that kind. I have seen a couple of touchscreens that work. I know of one machine that is sold. I think it is by Insound and built on the software from Web Speak, I believe it was. Is that the kind of thing that you're talking about here?

Mr. Wakefield. Very definitely yes. I saw the Webspeak type interface. The Smithsonian has had an exhibit up for some time now on the, I believe the correct term is the history of disability policy. It is not about gadgets, it is about the movement itself and policy and legislation and what took place and so on.

And they have a interactive kiosk that basically has a three or four key interface. And you can use the touchscreens if you wanted to, or use this three or four key interface. And it gives you the output in both regular print and large print if you wanted, or in audio.

Dr. Coombs. I noticed Bank of America and I think and Wells Fargo are putting out some talking ATM machines?

Mr. Wakefield. Yes. In California they are doing this. The thing is, this is one of those situations where it is doable. And until you insist on it, it does not happen. But it is becoming important enough now for producers and manufacturers to actually produce these types of machines.

And interestingly in our rule we basically, the philosophy is if you can build it in or if you can make the system compatible with adaptive technology, that is what you should do.

However if you cannot make it compatible, then you are going to have to build it in. You are not off the hook if you cannot make it compatible. So when it comes to ATMs and kiosks and so on, we very explicitly say that you cannot require a user to carry around their own assistive technology and attach it to one of these types of devices. You have got to build it in.

Dr. Coombs. What I want to know is next time I come to a government building and I want to get a coffee or a Coke or a sandwich from some vending machine, are the vending machines going to be accessible?

Mr. Wakefield. Um...

Mr. Banks. No.

Mr. Wakefield. Not only that Norm, but they are seldom owned by the government.

Dr. Coombs. Okay.

Mr. Wakefield. The vending machines make money; the government doesn't make money.

Dr. Coombs. You hear a lot these days about PalmPilots and PDAs and cellphones and wireless small handheld devices. What is going to happen to those things?

Mr. Wakefield. Those are posing a very big challenge. Because generally they do not allow for the attachment of external devices. And so therefore they have to have the technology built-in. Now if you have access technology built-in, it raises the issue of does every piece of equipment purchased by the government, that is a PalmPilot for instance, have to be a talking one? Even though maybe only a couple of hundred people are going to use it.

Our basic challenge has been talking calculators. You know we have got all kinds of talking calculators. Does this mean the government can buy one that does not talk? In theory what we are saying is that if it is possible, when you need it, to buy the one for somebody with the adaptive system built-in, fine. But if you are going to go out and buy a whole, you know then do it if you need it. You do not have to have specialized equipment on everybody's desk, including a talking calculator.

PalmPilots are a bigger challenge right now because there is no way to make them accessible. And therefore if an agency absolutely requires them, they are either going to have to claim that it is an undue burden to buy accessible ones.

Or they are going to have to prove that it is not only commercially impossible or not available, but it cannot be developed in time for the requirements of a request for a proposal. What they call and RFP, a request for a proposal. To make a long story short, agencies are going to have to think twice before running out and buying a hundred or two hundred thousand dollars worth of PalmPilots for every employee.

Dr. Coombs. I have two questions before we close out. The first one is essentially that we have a conflict between the standards that are going to go into effect Jun. 21^st. Is June 21rst correct?

Mr. Wakefield. That is correct.

Dr. Coombs. And you are also talking about things that may have to be made accessible, things like modifying technology. And most of that I do not think anybody is going to do between now and Jun. 21st.

Mr. Wakefield. This is an interesting issue. First of all remember that the history of all of this type of legislation, the ADA, etc, you do not retrofit. It is new products. So any procurement made after Jun. 21st must comply.

Dr. Coombs. I think some of them are going to have a hard time modifying the equipment in that short a time.

Mr. Wakefield. They may, except remember they have known about this for probably two years? And most government procurements take anywhere from six months to two years. So in reality, it isn't all of a sudden the procurements there on the 22nd of June. It is going to put to squeeze on definitely timewise.

On the other hand the software manufacturers in a public statement recently said they were concerned that agencies might have their own compliance testing. And this will slow things done, because they can come out with a new version in six months. And they do not want agencies slowing them done. And yet in another release they said, we think six months is too short. So you know teach and clatter around, it does not matter.

Dr. Coombs. Well most of us do not work for the government. It seems that what you are describing here will probably turn out to have a significant impact on people with disabilities who work for the government. What does it mean for the rest of us like Dick and mean?

Mr. Wakefield. I think it means, and I actually believe this very strongly. Let's say you are a software manufacturer and you develop version 11.2 to meet the guidelines or standards. Are you going to sell 11.2 to the government but only sell version ten to the general public? No. You are not going to run parallel lines. Those features that are required by the federal government are going to show up in commercial products right across the whole product line.

So I honestly feel that it is going to change, we are going to see it first in software. It is going to change the accessibility picture within the next year rather dramatically. I mean places like Corel WordPerfect are already saying that they are going to do more now to put keyboard access into WordPerfect. And other companies, Macromedia Flash, are saying they are working on Flash.

We are seeing; my wife and I met with some people this weekend, ProQuest. They service up a lot of databases to libraries across the country. And they are very concerned about making their software and their website and stuff, but it is a combination of application and so on, making it all accessible. They are not just going to make it accessible to government.

Dr. Coombs. Well I'm glad you said that Doug. Because it has been my conviction that the government is probably the nation's biggest purchaser of most anything, and companies ignored it for a long time because we were a small market. But now if the big market is demanding it, we are going to see a change for everyone.

Mr. Wakefield. And you know it is serious. I was talking with somebody today at Microsoft and they said that they are federal employees. Not employees, they are federal sales staff. We are just chafing at the bit as to how they could convince the chief information officers in the government that if they bought a particular Microsoft product how could they assure the CIOs that the product was accessible? Because the CIOs in the government are saying, we absolutely have to have it. And they have taken it awfully seriously. It is actually amazing.

Mr. Banks. Then there will actually will be change.

Mr. Wakefield. Of course there will. There will be change. And the other thing is this too; that I think is very interesting, here we have had all this discussion about the Web. Well do you want to take a stab at how many authors of web pages there are around the country?

Mr. Banks. No thank you.

Mr. Wakefield. Millions, millions. How many major software producers are there? You know, a hundred, seventyfive, whatever. So if you influenced ten percent of the software manufacturers, or let's say you influence the top three or four. You have made a significant impression on the market that we all deal with. As opposed to trying to influence a few Webmasters.

Mr. Banks. Not only that Doug, but if you have three or four of the major players making these kinds of changes the others are going to follow suit. Only because they have to.

Mr. Wakefield. They have to, to compete.

Mr. Banks. It is another selling feature to say that our products are accessible. And if they can say that, whether the other software manufacturers feel as though it is the right thing to do or not, they are going to do it.

Mr. Wakefield. Of course they are going to do it, yes. It is now good business.

Dr. Coombs. I am a historian, and historians are supposed to deal with the past. I am tempted to crawl out on a limb. It seems to me that 508 has the potential of having more impact on changing technology that the ADA had.

Mr. Wakefield. Will certainly on changing technology. The ADA, let's face it, is basically aimed at what is called the built environment. And it didn't really tackle technology much, unless you talk about technology for transportation and that sort of thing. But information technology did not tackle in the ADA. And even though 508 is government, in our office we have and I am not overstating at all, we have been surprised at the concerned interest or impact that this rulemaking has had.

Dr. Coombs. Well Doug I will tell you we would like to have you back. I do not know whether on June 21st or when? Maybe before then. And we can get some kind of progress report. We want to thank you for all your hard work on this and hope that your wife doesn't miss you too much, because I know you're going to do a lot of traveling.

Mr. Wakefield. I'll leave her a tape.

Mr. Banks. I hope she hears that.

Mr. Wakefield. She will.

Mr. Banks. Thanks a whole lot Doug.

Dr. Coombs. Will you had better center some flowers too. Bye-bye.

Mr. Wakefield. Bye.