Tobias Nyhuus Jensen, P\u00e4r Lanner\u00f6, Jakob Rosin, Kosei Oki, Sander Nijsingh, Sanna Kramsi, Viet Ba Hirvola, Nadezhda T\u00f6rnroos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Comment needed on the EN 301 549 v. 4.1.1 draft, which needs to be clarified, since if you interpret it by the wording, it could mean that you can offer two biological alternatives and thus live up to the criteria. Also, what is the meaning of “for control of the ICT”?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Christer Janzon sent some notes before the meeting for the first draft version we worked on in this meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Can we ask the editor of the EN 301 549 standard when we have an understanding document? P\u00e4r said we could probably check with Mike Pluke.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The webinar from IAAP has touched upon the topic before: https:\/\/youtu.be\/VgXFHKD8FuI?si=YksxcyFMfyZPveF0&t=602<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n We also discussed what is considered a proper “oral format” for information on the accessibility of the services. Sweden points towards screen reader output, and Denmark gives suggestions that video or audio formats could be some examples. There’s no clear definition, though. Are telephone calls sufficient? It is unclear.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Participants Tobias Nyhuus Jensen, P\u00e4r Lanner\u00f6, Jakob Rosin, Kosei Oki, Sander Nijsingh, Sanna Kramsi, Viet Ba Hirvola, Nadezhda T\u00f6rnroos. Notes Comment needed on the EN 301 549 v. 4.1.1 draft, which needs to be clarified, since if you interpret it … Continue reading Oral format for accessibility statements under European Accessibility Act<\/h2>\n\n\n\n