<Quote>
For accessibility, the presentational form has to vary to meet end user
need, yet here they mandate binding them.
</Quote>
Are these two requirements (varying the presentational form to meet user
needs and binding presentation with content and context) orthogonal?
Kind Regards,
Joe Chiusano
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
Dave Pawson wrote:
>
> At 14:30 29/10/2003, you wrote:
> >Hi Dave,
> >
> >We certainly can't assume that all electronic forms are accessible. Of
> >course, given that this was a federal-sponsored initiative accessibility
> >was one of the main topics. There was an Accessibility subteam
> >(described in more detail in the URL I provided in my previous e-mail),
> >and one of the recommendations at the end states that it should be
> >ensured that "e-forms support Section 508 accessibility requirements.
> >This is a critical requirement, mandated by law.".
>
> So combining that with
>
> > > >addition, any signature must be applied to this combination of
> > > >presentation, content, and context, and the authentication process must
> > > >ensure integrity.
>
> That's what has me confused.
> For accessibility, the presentational form has to vary to meet end user need,
> yet here they mandate binding them.
>
> Must be gov logic:-)
>
> regards DaveP
