[nfbcs] FW: [IDevices] Your Help Is Needed, Apple Feedback

[Mike Freeman]

O Lord! That will mean that they will be even more impossible to understand or enforce than they are now! (grin) 
Mike freeman 

On Sep 1, 2013, at 13:53, Jude DaShiell <jdashiel at shellworld.net> wrote:

> What everybody needs to understand is that accessibility standards with 
> the next revision are going to start encompassing usability as well.  
> http://www.usability.gov/ for those interested in what's on the horizon 
> should help with a sense of what's about to come.
> 
> On Sat, 31 Aug 2013, Steve Jacobson wrote:
> 
>> Ian and others,
>> 
>> To some degree, I probably contributed to this topic spinning out of control.  Since I consider Mike to be a good friend, I think that I can safely say he would not likely disagree with the idea that work-arounds 
>> are short term.  I have a number of concerns with where we are right now with accessibility, and I no for certain that some of my concerns are shared by Mike.  I also think that some of my frustrations with 
>> becoming comfortable with the iPhone have caused me not to be as clear as I might have been.  I appreciate very much the tips several people have given, for example, for dialing extra digits after a call has 
>> been completed.  Actually, I've used the commas in dialing strings as has been suggested, and that is a good fix, but of course it doesn't work when entering variable responses, and I don't think I would 
>> choose to enter banking information that way.  However, I believe strongly that Mike's point is correct that we have to be careful of what we ask for in the name of accessibility and what are "nice-to-haves.  I 
>> would say, though, that we have the right to ask for nice-to-haves but we need to be careful whether we claim accessibility to get them.  For example, I mentioned that it has become more difficult on the last 
>> few phones to enter my voicemail password for work.  My previous phone was a Windows Mobile 6 smartphone with a QWERTY keyboard across one end.  I seriously doubt that a sighted person could dial or 
>> enter a pass code on that phone any easier than I could.  Much of the frustration I expressed with BusLine are frustrations that would likely be encountered to some degree by sighted persons.  Certainly the 
>> issue surrounding the need to mute the phone would be the same.  My point is partly that just because something may not be a true accessibility issue doesn't mean we don't have the right to request it, but we 
>> need to be careful of where we play the accessibility card.  It is sometimes easy to blame any frustration that we might have on accessibility, but some frustrations are simply those experienced by everyone 
>> when dealing with rapidly changing technology, and there is a lot we can learn from one another.  
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Steve Jacobson
>> 
>> On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 18:06:48 -0400, I. C. Bray wrote:
>> 
>>> Mike,
>> 
>>> I think the point is that if you can get the native problem fixed instead of 
>>> using a work-a-round, it is preferred.
>>> Any time someone asks for feedback, input, or commentary on how to "fix" a 
>>> problem, it is an opportunity to do just that.
>> 
>>> Work-a-rounds are temporary solutions, in my opinion.  Sharing work-a-rounds 
>>> is great, but the issue should be resolved natively.
>> 
>>> This makes the long-run support of any product more viable.  There will 
>>> always be a short-cut, but fix the problem, and you won't need them.
>>