Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
From: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: Voice Carry Over
Message-ID: <13685@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 25 Aug 90 04:29:26 GMT
Sender: news@bunker.UUCP
Reply-To: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org
Distribution: misc
Organization: FidoNet node 1:129/26 - SoundingBoard, Pittsburgh PA
Lines: 58
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP

Index Number: 9969

 RM> From: GE0013@SIUCVMB.BITNET (Roy Miller)
 RM> Message-ID: <13583@bunker.UUCP>

Hi, Roy.

 RM> There is one problem with the VCO here in Illinois.  For some
 RM> unknown to me reason, once the VCO link is enabled if you talk
 RM> too long without giving the other party a chance to say
 RM> something then you are automatically cut off.  I don't know why
 RM> this happens,

I think that happens because when you use voice instead of typing,
you by-pass the relay operator.  If the operator recieves nothing
for an extended period, the system must time out.  I hope we get
our Pennsylvania relay up and running on schedule next month.

 RM> You mentioned that you were going to Washington for the ANSI
 RM> A117 committee hearings.  I know you are the SHHH
 RM> representative on that committee, but I would like to know more
 RM> about exactly what the committee does.  If you get a little
 RM> time, could you post an explanation of the makeup, functions,
 RM> and legislative mandate of the committee.

Quick answer, Roy, to a question that deserves better.  ANSI is the
American National Standards Institute.  Like all ANSI standards,
A117 is a "voluntary" standard.  There is no legislative mandate
unless and until the standard is adopted or "referenced" by some
governmental body having the authority to legislate.  The committee's
charge is writing and maintaining ANSI A-117.1, the "American National
Standard for Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities".  This
standard is adopted by reference in a few building codes, and is
expected to receive somewhat more respect with the passage of ADA.

Your question re makeup of the committee is most significant.  My
prior A117 experience had been with subcommittees or "Task Forces"
which were made up primarily of persons with disabilities or their
advocates.  The atmosphere there was supportive and cooperative.
To my dismay, I find that this makeup does not extend to the full
committee.  There the disability advocates are outnumbered by 3:1
in the voting membership.  Some others represent facility owners
(who don't want to spend money on access), manufacturers of various
hardware products and fixtures (who wish to minimize impact on their
operations), architects (who think they know our needs much better
than we do ourselves), and building code officials (who seem to feel
a need to defend their turf).  The parenthetical expressions above
my personal perceptions.  I hope the reality is more encouraging.

Results in the committee were mixed.  We won some and we lost some,
but it's not over 'till it's over.  If you'd like to know more, we
can continue this via netmail.  Good to hear from you.

... Jack.

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org