Well, if a volunteer on there would scan it, but also, Bookshare could get
text directly from ARRL, but recording it in an audio form takes time
whoever does it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: Digital QST And Accessibility
> Who wants to pay the rates for bookshare? They probably couldn't get it
> done
> any faster then the NLS can and the NLS is free.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Keithley" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 7:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Digital QST And Accessibility
>
>
>>I wonder if bookshare could be persuaded to carry QST. That way it would
>>be
>>accessible.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: richard fiorello <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask],
>> Date: Tuesday, Mar 20, 2012 12:03:37 PM
>> Subject: Re: Digital QST And Accessibility
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Very well written.
>>> I suspect that some sort of plain txt or pdf without the pictures might
>>> be needed but that certainly shouldn't be impossible.
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Buddy Brannan <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Date: Tuesday, Mar 20, 2012 01:33:49 PM
>>> Subject: Digital QST And Accessibility
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > A fellow blind ham apparently spoke to someone at HQ recently to ask =
>>> > about the upcoming digital edition of QST. The person he spoke to
>>> > seemed =
>>> > to indicate, according to Scott, that not only was the digital edition
>>> > =
>>> > of QST not going to be accessible, but there were no plans to make it
>>> > =
>>> > accessible.=20
>>> >
>>> > Needless to say, this is disappointing, if true.=20
>>> >
>>> > However, it's possible that there is a misunderstanding of the issues
>>> > =
>>> > involved here. We of course don't want a special edition, or something
>>> > =
>>> > like that. However, it seems to me that an online edition of QST could
>>> > =
>>> > be inherently usable by blind members. There are, of course, formats =
>>> > that just don't work well (or at all) with screen access technology.
>>> > The =
>>> > system that CQ Communications has chosen to implement, for instance, =
>>> > can't be used by screen readers. Your standard garden variety PDF, =
>>> > however, will read with most screen readers, assuming that the PDF
>>> > isn't =
>>> > solely an image scan of a paper document.=20
>>> >
>>> > I would be interested to know what digital format the ARRL will be
>>> > using =
>>> > for its electronic distribution. Knowing this will help determine =
>>> > whether or not I will be able to read it when it becomes available.=20
>>> >
>>> > While I wasn't on the call that I mentioned, I can tell you that my =
>>> > friend felt as though he was not valued as a member in good standing,
>>> > =
>>> > that his membership was somehow less important because of his =
>>> > disability, perhaps that he was asking for something unreasonable.
>>> > Bear
>>> > =
>>> > in mind that, while we do get QST on tape from the Library of
>>> > Congress,
>>> > =
>>> > the issue comes about two months after the general public gets it. I,
>>> > =
>>> > for one, would be willing to pay full freight for a membership that =
>>> > included a timely and accessible version of QST. However, if my =
>>> > membership as a blind ham is of no value to the League, perhaps i
>>> > should =
>>> > rethink that. Note that I have no reason yet to believe that this is
>>> > the =
>>> > case, but one of the staff's members has certainly left at least one =
>>> > member with this impression, not by the possible inaccessibility of
>>> > the
>>> > =
>>> > digital edition, but rather by the way the issue was handled. Or, =
>>> > rather, blown off.=20
>>> >
>>> > I would love to discuss this further. We can start with what format
>>> > the
>>> > =
>>> > digital edition will take and go from there.=20
>>> >
>>> > While I must admit to some disappointment that accessibility wasn't
>>> > even =
>>> > considered when the decision was made to go digital, and, to my =
>>> > knowledge, no blind members were contacted to get any input on the =
>>> > issue, I would like to believe that this is something that can be =
>>> > considered now. Better late than never.
>>> >
>>> > Vy 73,
>>> > --
>>> > Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
>>> > Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
>
|
