Draft Minutes for Meeting 3 of the
Accessible Information and Communications Standards
Development Committee (IC-SDC)

Monday July 16th and Tuesday July 17th, 2007

 Canadian Standards Association
5060 Spectrum Way, Suite 100
Mississauga, ON  L4W 5N6

 Present 

• Laura Talbot, (Chair) Talbotallan Consulting Group
• Kelly MacKenzie, Canadian Hearing Society
• Karen Taylor,  Canadian National Institute for the Blind
• Rozalyn Werner-Arce, Community Living Ontario
• Tara Jeji,  Association for Persons with Physical Disabilities of Windsor and Essex County
• Diane Wagner, Learning Disabilities of Ontario
• Sue Morgan, Independent Living Resource Centre of Waterloo Region
• Geoff Eden, (Individual) (Consumer)
• Francine Drouin Regroupement des Parents et Amis des Enfants Sourds et Malentendants Franco-Ontarien (RESO)
• Dan Shire, IBM Canada
• Robert Pearson, Sun Life Financial
• Doug Jure, Bloor-Yorkville BIA
• Michelle Saunders, Ontario Restaurant, Hotel and Motel Association
• Martha Johnson, TD Bank/Trust Companies
• Bill Munson, Information Technology Association of Canada for Ontario
• Rt. Rev. George Elliott, The Anglican Diocese of Toronto & Provincial Synod of Ontario
• Lari Langford, Ontario Library Association
• Sherrill McCall, Cambrian College of Applied Arts & Technology
• Darren Cooper, Ontario Federation of Labour/ Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario
• Don Halpert, Ontario Hospital Association
• Beth Cooper, Ontario Public School Boards Association
• Jeanette Parsons, Council of Ontario Universities
• Mary Reid, City of Ottawa/ Association of Municipalities of Ontario
• Elizabeth Daly, Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMTCO)
• Patricia McDonell, City of Toronto
• Rose Langhout, Ministry of Government Services
• Eileen Mahood, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
• Israel Lyon, Ministry of Economic Development and Trade/Ministry of Small Business and Entrepreneurship
• Stacey Young, Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities

 Guests

• Tony Mazur, Ministry of Community and Social Services
• Laurie Lucas, Ministry of Community and Social Services
• Nadine McDermott, Ministry of Attorney General
• Patrick Parent, KPMG
• Gary Sandor, KPMG
• Jutta Treviranus, ARTC, University of Toronto

Support Unit

• Scot Weers, ADO
• Nelly Tion, ADO
• Beverley Milligan, ADO
• David Dilks, Lura Consulting
• Marsha Cheddi, Canadian Standards Association

Format of Committee Minutes and References:

For the purposes of referencing committee documents and items in the minutes, CSA has adopted the reference system used by ISO (International Organization of Standardization):

• N represents documents / presentations; and
• M represents the minute items / sections

IC-SDC Meeting 3 Documents and Presentation Material

SUMMARY OF ACTIONS

ACTION 1:  Support Unit to add document number to Members’ Charter.

ACTION 2: Support Unit to provide IC-SDC members that were not present at Meeting 3

with a summary document to recap the discussions on the draft seed document and solicit their feedback.

ACTION 3: Support Unit to prepare an updated draft of the seed document based on committee feedback and email to the committee for comment in advance of IC-SDC Meeting 4.

ACTION 4: D. Shire to provide a technology demonstration at IC-SDC Meeting 4 in September.

ACTION 5:  The following IC-SDC members to deliver leading practices presentations at IC-SDC Meeting 4 in September: S. Morgan and R. Werner-Arce.

Day 1 – July 16th, 2007

M3.1 Call to Order

• L. Talbot convened the IC-SDC Meeting 3 at 9:30 AM.

M3.2 Housekeeping and Facility Safety

• M. Cheddi reviewed the facility safety and housekeeping procedures with the committee.

M3.3 Opening Remarks

• L. Talbot, IC-SDC Chair welcomed committee members to IC-SDC Meeting 3.  The Chair noted that nine committee members are not present but we do have quorum.   The Chair suggested that the Support Unit put together a detailed recap of the seed document discussions that will take place over the two days for those that could not attend the meeting.
  
• The Chair welcomed IC-SDC member Tara Jeji. T. Jeji represents the Association for Persons with Physical Disabilities of Windsor and Essex County. Tara contributes significantly to spinal cord injury research.
  
• The Chair also welcomed Nadine McDermott from the Ministry of Attorney General who is responsible for Compliance.  Nadine was an observer at the meeting.

M3.4 Approval of the Agenda, Process Overview and Plan for the 2 days

• The Committee approved the draft agenda (N59 R1) without modification.
  
• The Chair reviewed the IC-SDC meeting dates.  Meeting 4 will be held on September 17th and 18th at CSA in Mississauga.

M3.5 Approval of the Minutes to the Last Meeting

• The Committee approved the draft minutes from IC-SDC Meeting 2 (N57) without modification.

M3.6 Review of Action Items from the Last Meeting

• M. Cheddi reviewed action items (N57) from last meeting.  All actions were complete except for adding document numbers to the IC-SDC Meeting 3 agenda.  This will be implemented for subsequent meeting agendas.

M3.7 Review and Refine IC-SDC Charter (N27 R1)

• IC-SDC Members had no comments on the Charter. 
  
• A document number needs to be added to the Charter.

M3.8 Guiding Principles and Long Term Objectives (N63, N63 R1)

• The Committee reviewed the Guiding Principles and Long Term Objectives (N58).  Updates were made based on committee discussions.  The final set of Guiding Principles and Long Term Objectives that will be submitted to the Minster as Deliverable 2 will be agreed to at IC-SDC Meeting 4.

M3.9 Leading Practices Presentation #1

• Received a presentation by representatives of the Ontario Public Service (OPS) on the recent creation of the Information and Information Technology Accessibility Centre of Excellence, which is intended to support the OPS commitment to become a leader in accessibility.  Committee members were encouraged to learn about the Centre’s creation and asked to be updated on progress.

M3.10 Context and General Discussion about Proposed IC Seed Document (N65)

CSA Context on Seed Document:

• The seed document is comprised of 7 sections and is organized consistent with a typical CSA standard:

1.0  Scope

2.0 Definitions

3.0 Classes

4.0 Accessible Information and Communication Requirements aimed at Systemic Change

5.0 Accessible Information and Communications Accessibility Requirements

a. Presentation of information (provision of information)

b. Reception and Control (receipt of information)

6.0 Accessible Information and Communication Sector Requirements
7.0 Implementation targets (by class)

• Clauses 1 to 3 are administrative clauses with no technical requirements. 
  
• Clause 4 presents general, system requirements aimed at organizational change and continuous improvement.  Clause 4.5 specifies requirements aimed at mapping user accessibility needs.  Clause 4 addresses training and interoperability. 
  
• Clause 5 contains draft technical requirements that define potential information and communications performance requirements based on a personalization framework proposed by J. Treviranus at IC-SDC Meeting 2.  At Meeting 2, various approaches to standardizing information and communications accommodations were presented and discussed (N49).  J. Treviranus presented the committee with an approach (in matrix format) that focused on making Information and Communication accessible based on individual user needs.  There was general agreement from committee members for this approach.   Clause 5 of the seed document is thus based on the two matrices (N60) developed by J. Treviranus that match information and communication access to individual access needs.
  
• Clause 6 of the seed document is a “placeholder” for sector requirements that would be specific and additional to the obligations imposed by Clause 5.  While examples of such requirements were included in the seed document, they are largely illustrative as opposed to specific proposals.
  
• Clause 7 is a “placeholder” for implementation targets.  Clause 3 and 7 are related in that the committee will need to define classes of persons and organizations that will be obligated to implement and comply with general and technical requirements by specific years prior to 2025.
  
• In developing / refining / editing the seed document, the goal is to develop clear and measurable requirements. Interpretive Guidelines will be developed by the ADO (Accessibility Directorate of Ontario) at a future date to support how the requirements can be implemented. 

ADO Context on Seed Document:

• In drafting the requirements of the standard it is important to understand that, unlike the Ontario’s Human Right Code, the AODA does not establish an individual complaints-based system.  Unlike the Code, the AODA does not contemplate or provide for “undue hardship” or other kinds of defense for individual organizations in complying with the requirements. The AODA requires that standards development committees take into account economic, technical and other factors in developing proposed standards so that requirements are “doable” by the organizations that have to comply with the standard. 
  
• The AODA standards establish requirements that all identified organizations can and have to comply with. Persons with disabilities continue to have the right to file complaints under the Code, and organizations continue to have the “undue hardship” defense with respect to those complaints. AODA standards requirements cannot duplicate what is already provided for in other legislation including the AODA and the Code.  For example, requiring organizations to have a policy on accessible information and communication is simply repeating what is already provided for in the AODA (“standards must set out policies, practices…” etc.). 
  
• Keep in mind that we are setting requirements for 2025 that are currently impossible for implementation for today – this is continuous improvement so that we achieve the impossible in 2025.
  
• In reviewing each clause of the seed document, committee members were required to ask themselves the following questions:
  • a. Is the requirement consistent with achieving the purpose of the AODA (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005) and its requirements? Is the requirement consistent with the principles established by the SDC?
  • b. Does the requirement conflict with or duplicate other legislation and standards?
  • c. Is the requirement clear enough that:  an organization can have a reasonable level of confidence that it will know when it has achieved compliance?
  • d. Is the requirement doable by one or more organizations or groups or types of organizations?

General Discussion on Seed Document:

• Reference to other standards - the use of rolling references that point to other standards was discussed.  It is government policy not to have rolling references due to the regulatory challenges it poses.  For example, if a standard is referenced at a certain moment in time, if the standard that is referenced changes, it will need to be reviewed to ensure its continued relevance to the IC Standard.
  
• Classes of Organizations - at a high-level the committee should begin to think about classes of organizations that may be required to comply with some or all of the requirements of the standard.  There are various methods to define class (e.g., by sector - public, private, not for profit, by size of organization, etc.).
  
• A committee member suggested that classes of information also be considered.
  
• There was agreement by the committee to move the 3 approaches out of the Annex and put it into requirements as methods to achieve compliance.  The Chair noted that the three approaches to providing equal access might connect to classes of organizations.

M3.11 Small Retail Example (N68)

• J. Treviranus presented an example of how the requirements in the draft IC Seed Document (N61) might be implemented in a small retail organization.

Day 2 – July 17th, 2007

M3.12 KPMG Presentation (N66, N68)

• The committee received two presentations from KPMG on readiness and costing.  The readiness research which includes a survey, interviews, and case study reviews is currently in progress.  The readiness survey closed on July 27th.  The data collected will be analyzed in August and findings will be presented at IC-SDC Meeting 4 in September.
  
• The costing research will be an on-going and collaborative effort between KPMG and the IC-SDC throughout the IC standard development process.  The costing methodology will consider the cost gap between where organizations are today versus where they will be required to be based on the IC Standard.  The methodology will also consider economies of scale based on availability of current technologies and demand as well as the opportunities / benefits that organizations might expect to gain from complying with the standard.

M3.13 Review of Proposed Seed Document (N61)

• K. Boehmer from CSA conducted a clause by clause review of the seed document and committee members commented and provided feedback on the clauses.  The feedback was documented and will be included in the next draft of the seed document.
  
• The Chair requested that a summary of this discussion be documented and circulated to IC-SDC members that were not present at the meeting. 

M3.14 Next Steps to develop Draft 1 of the IC Standard

• The table below identifies the key next steps agreed to by the committee for developing the next draft of the IC seed document:

• J. Treviranus provided a brief technology demonstration on technology enabled personalization and how this can be achieved with very little investment using legacy systems, software, and equipment.  “Web-4-All” is a system for easily configuring multi-user public access computer workstations.  J. Treviranus had a variety of smart cards (e.g., bell phone card, an RBC smartcard, etc.) each loaded with someone’s unique accessibility profile. The card works to set the internet preferences the person wants (homepage preference, screen reader, highlighting of text to follow along, font magnification, contrasts, etc.)
  • The following website provides additional information about “Web-4-all”: http://web-4-all.ca/html/english/w4a_home_e.html

M3.16 Leading Practices Presentation #2

• Received a leading practices presentation from G. Eden on the progress of local accessibility advisory committees; and M. Reid on the City of Ottawa’s comprehensive municipal accessibility strategy and their work with the MUSH sector (Municipalities, Universities, Schools, Hospitals).
  
• The successes to date with respect to procurement, on demand taxi service, upgraded TTY service and websites, and accessibility training for front line staff and managers will result in “curb cut effects and electronic curb cut effects”.
  
• Many of these initiatives were developed with extensive input from members of the community.

M3.17 Leading Practices Presentation #3 (N69)

• Received a leading practices presentation from D. Shire on IBM’s approach to accessibility in the provision of services and products to its customers.  "Accessibility—which started out as a philanthropic effort—has now evolved to a business transformation effort for IBM and our clients." — Sam Palmisano, IBM CEO
  
• IBM has assessed the various international standards for accessibility (such as WCAG 1.0, US S508, etc.) and has harmonized and synthesized these standards into a series of practical checklists which can be applied to specific delivery platforms (e.g., Web, Java, software, Lotus Notes, and documentation). 
  
• The IBM accessibility home page can be found at: www.ibm.com/able 

M3.18 IC-SDC Document Repository Website

• The CSA web development team presented the “test” version of the “IC-SDC Document Repository” for committee input and feedback.

M3.19 Communiqué Preparation

• Additional content was added to the communiqué.

M3.20 Review updated definitions and acronyms document (N28 R2)

• No changes were made to the Glossary of Terms.

M3.21 Work plan Review and Update (N55 R1)

• Updated work plan.

M3.22 Communiqué Completion (N70)

• D. Dilks and the SDC finalized the IC-SDC Meeting 3 Communiqué.

M3.23 Other Business

• ADO is in the process of determining if the ADO website can be modified to allow members of the public to submit comments on the work of the IC-SDC.

Adjourn

• IC-SDC Meeting 3 was adjourned at 4:00 PM.

• Print this article
• Email this article