InterNational
Committee for
Information Technology
Standards
Information Technology
Access Interfaces
Technical Committee
(INCITS/V2)
US TAG to ISO/IEC JTC1 SC 35
US TAG to ISO/IEC JTC1 SC
35 WG 6
ANNUAL REPORT
Annual Report for: INCITS/V2, US TAG to ISO IEC JTC1 SC35,
US TAG to ISO IEC JTC1 SC35 WG6
Covering the Period from October 2002 to October 2003
Title of INCITS Subgroup: Information Technology Access Interfaces
Links:
Informal Description of Work:
Though V2 is charged with developing national standards for Information
Technology Access Interfaces, we believe that our resulting standards will
impact how everyone in the world interacts with intelligent devices of all
kinds.
Current practice in providing IT accommodation support for people
with disabilities involves tailoring or configuring assistive technology
to meet each individual's needs, abilities, and preferences, and integrating
the result with existing devices in the users' different environments.
Frequently, assistive technologies need to be developed or adapted to work
with each device in the user's environment. The resulting systems are often
unique within the environment in which they are installed. Consequently,
those using these systems experience difficulties getting technical help,
are frequently ignored or experience inordinate delays when all other systems
are upgraded, and are not as mobile as others in accepting new job assignments
and promotions, or operating in different environments. There is a
need for a standard that simplifies or eliminates the customization required
when assistive technologies are connected to devices, and to provide industry
with a common means of interacting with a wide variety of assistive technologies.
The first project of the technical committee has been to develop
standards for an Alternative Interface Access Protocol (AIAP). This
protocol complements and builds on industry activity in home networking,
wireless networking, and metadata registries for discovery and interoperation
of devices. The aim is to make it easier to fulfill the alternate interface
connection needs of people with disabilities that are called for in recent
government regulations, such as Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act
and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. The Alternative Interface Access
Protocol and related standards will enable IT products to be more accommodating
of the needs and preferences of the consumer by allowing for alternative
user interfaces. While addressing the special needs of people with
disabilities, the option to change interfaces will have a broader market
application. Indeed we believe that these standards will revolutionize
how we all, throughout the world, interact with electronics and information
technology (E & IT) in the near future.
V2 also serves as the U.S. TAG (Technical Advisory Group) for ISO/IEC
JTC 1 SC35, User Interfaces, and SC35 WG6, User Interfaces for People with
Special Needs - including the Elderly and Disabled.
1. Executive Summary
As of this report, INCITS/V2 has 16 member organizations of record; has
held 13 Plenary meetings (4 during the period of this report) and over 100
informal working meetings (most by teleconference). The committee
has a draft specification for the Universal Remote Console component of the
Alternative Interface Access Protocol (AIAP-URC) and ancillary specifications.
The committee has finished incorporating a new architecture into all documents.
Work continues by several organizations on developing prototypes and most
of the organizations have modified their implementations to track the new
design. As of our last Plenary meeting (October 7 - 9, 2003 in Madison,
WI), INCITS/V2 has frozen the AIAP architecture and technical decisions about
the content of the specifications. A final pass ensuring the consistent incorporation
of these decisions and the incorporation of necessary informative expository
material remains prior to release of the document for Public Review.
We expect to have a letter ballot on Public Review during January, 2004.
To assure the robustness to be operable in diverse ways, the AIAP-URC adopts
the model/view/controller paradigm as employed in the Java programming language
and the XForms technology. The formats defined by the standard effectively
separate essential content of the operational dialog from adaptable presentation
detail. The target provides a complete core of the essential elements of
an interface, and as much replaceable interface presentation detail as it
wishes to. The URC provides the user an interface they can use which
remains faithful to the essential core and uses or replaces presentation
properties as appropriate to the URC device in use and the needs and preferences
of the user.
In response to V2's request, INCITS agreed to delegate to V2 the U.S. TAG
responsibility for ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC35, User Interfaces, and SC35 WG6, User
Interfaces for People with Special Needs - Including the Elderly and Disabled.
2. Significant Accomplishments
The Alternative Interface Access Protocol (AIAP) is a set of standards
for the discovery, selection, configuration, and operation of user interfaces
and options. These standards could apply to personal devices, stand-alone
or networked systems, and network-based services (all designated 'targets').
Devices include consumer electronics -- radios, televisions, etc.; as well
as household appliances and environmental controls where the human control
interfaces are managed by embedded computers. Stand-alone or networked systems
include computer kiosks such as ATMs, electronic voting, ticket purchasing
machines, way finding and other information kiosks, etc. The AIAP conveys
information about user interface content and functionality; user preferences;
target capabilities; and user commands. It allows alternative interfaces
to be accommodated or constructed, in real-time if necessary, to provide
fundamental access to computing services and information regardless of any
limitation of the user.
There are 4 ways that AIAP is currently envisioned to provide a means for
users to change the user interface:
- By using an alternate user interface component instead of the
native user interface component.
- By allowing a person to use a complete alternate user interface
(which includes its own alternate input, control and display mechanisms)
instead of the native input, control and display mechanisms on the product
(a "Universal Remote Console").
- By allowing the user to cause their characteristics or user interface
preferences to be communicated to the target product (either directly or
by providing a code which the device uses to look up the user preference or
characteristics) where the target product changes its own user interface behavior
based on the user preferences or needs.
- By allowing the user to cause new user interface software to
be determined and downloaded onto the target device directly or indirectly.
We are currently concentrating on the Universal Remote Console
variant (described under bullet 2, above, AIAP-URC). We have a working
draft of the AIAP-URC specification being used to support the reference
implementations.
This specification defines a standard technology platform that
allows users to operate a mass market device or service (what we call a target)
from another, separately developed and purchased device. The two devices
must
both implement the relevant sections of the standard, but don't have to
incorporate any information specific to the other device.
The user interacts with the target through the Universal Remote
Console (URC). The URC may be a dedicated device, but will more often
be a feature running on a computer, a cell phone, an Assistive Technology,
or other device. (This functionality is also associated with the term
"Accessor", although accessor is a more general term that also includes alternate
interface components). The "Universal" in "Universal Remote Console refers
to the fact that the user's URC will work with all targets whose abstract
User Interface complies with the AIAP-URC specification.
The technical requirements to ensure adaptability, whether to third-party
devices, or to individual needs and preferences, are very much the same.
We believe that the approach we have adopted fills an unmet need in the
emerging world of pervasive computing. As pervasive computing diffuses
into the worlds of home, office, and public transaction technology, there
will be a burgeoning market for remote operation and an eventual realization
that remote operation capability comes with an unavoidable device- independence
requirement. This standard will meet that requirement gracefully, combining
the spit and polish of hand-crafted interfaces with the robustness to work
well with diverse devices and individual needs.
The key to this approach is that the target provides an abstract
version of its user interface using the AIAP-URC specified XML based language
to URC devices connected to it via a network protocol. This abstract version
of the user interface must contain no assumptions as to the presentation
mode (visual, auditory, or tactile) of the user interface. (Hinting
to facilitate particular presentations may be provided, but the presentations
in all modes must be comprehensible without use of the hints.) The
AIAP standard defines the requirements for the underlying network to facilitate
the interaction between the URC and the target. The URC software takes
the abstract user interface (UI) and renders it as a concrete UI on the users
remote console device. The concrete UI may be visual, speech-based,
braille-based, or in some other form.
The burden on the target manufacturer is relatively light if their
product is network controllable: the manufacturer just has to provide one
abstract UI for their product, using the AIAP abstract UI description capability.
This one abstract UI can then accommodate the needs of a wide range of users
with a variety of devices, sharing common UI characteristics. Examples
include someone watching television and using a URC as a remote control to
their entertainment center; or someone turning the home security system on
or off from their bedroom or from their office; or someone with a disability
using a URC as an alternate interface to a product they cannot otherwise access.
If the manufacturer wishes to provide customized concrete UIs to
optimize aesthetics and usability for certain classes of users or devices,
the manufacturer may provide one or more device-tailored concrete UIs consistent
with the abstract UI. The AIAP model employs a flexible framework that accommodates
the notion of abstract user interfaces without sacrificing the achievements
of our previous work. The model is well aligned with related standards
and technologies, such as XForms, UpNP and other Web Services and consumer
electronics technologies. V2 has completed working on modifications
to the current AIAP specification to reflect the new model and has entered
the final editing phase.
As of our most recent meeting, #13, October
7, 8, and 9, we have frozen our technical development of user interface functionality.
A final pass ensuring the consistent incorporation of these decisions and
the incorporation of necessary informative expository material remains
prior to release of the document for Public Review.
Four participating organizations
have demonstrable reference implementations (Trace, NIST, the Wireless RERC,
and Madentec). Two other organizations have indicated interest in developing
such implementations. These implementations use different technologies
and are used to ensure that the specifications are implementable and generic.
During the last year, V2 has been assigned the
U.S. TAG responsibility for ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC35, User Interfaces, and SC35
WG6, User Interfaces for People with Special Needs - Including the Elderly
and Disabled by INCITS. Our IR (International Representative)
represented V2 as a member of the U.S. delegation to the JTC1 Cross-Cultural
Coordination and Linguistic Matters Meeting in Geneva, June 2-3, 2003, Geneva,
Switzerland. We have provide recommendations to INCITS on U.S. positions
on several issues and documents. We will have three delegates at the
upcoming SC35 plenary taking place in Paris, France (December 1 to 5, 2003).
Our IR will be the U.S. Head of Delegation.
3. Significant Challenges
Retaining and adding to membership. Coordination and
harmonization with other organizations developing standards and specifications
with overlapping scopes (JTC1 SC35 and SC36, OASIS UIML, CMU Pebbles Project,
MIT Project Oxygen, NIST Pervasive Computing Project). One V2 member
has offered to provide part of the funding request by INCITS to support
U.S. participation in SC35. Additional funding will be needed.
See above.
4. Expected Challenges
- We will be losing 5 to 7 member organizations next
year. We have gained 5 organizations and lost 5 organization in the
last year. If our recruiting remains flat or drops at all we will lose
critical mass.
- Many other countries have become very interested
in ensuring that telecommunications, electronic devices, and information
technologies are accessible and usable by all, including people with disabilities.
As a result, several countries are aggressively seeking solutions in the
same problem space that INCITS/V2 has been charged with addressing.
ISO/IEC JTC1 has addressed this interest by establishing Sub
Committee 35, User Interfaces (see above).
5. Committee Activities
a. Previous Year's Meetings:
10. January 19 - 20, 2003; Orlando, FL & January 22
- 23, 2003; Gaithersburg, MD [Joint with DCMI]
11. March 17 - 18, 2003; Los Angeles, CA
12. June 17 - 18, 2003; Atlanta, GA
13. October 7 - 9, 2003; Madison, WI
V2 has had about 50 working meetings this year, most of which were teleconferences.
These ranged from detailed sessions dealing with 'open issues' in the specifications,
to editing sessions, to bi-weekly Managers' Meetings and U.S. TAG discussions.
Most such meetings are open to all participants and prototype implementors.
b. Next Year's Planned Meetings:
14. January 12 - 13, 2004; Gaithersburg, MD
15. March 15 - 16, 2004; Los Angeles
16. June ? - ?, 2004; Gaithersburg, MD [Plenary and Implementors' Workshops]
17. October ? - ?, 2004; Madison, WI
6. Liaison Activities
External:
- W3C/WIA. Common interest in needs and preferences based selection
of services or rendering. Maintain continuing exchange of information through
overlapping membership.
- The Accessibility Forum. Common interest in AT / E &
IT Interoperability. Maintain continuing exchange of information through
overlapping membership.
- UPnP Forum. Common interest in selection of services or features.
We have established a formal liaison with this organization.
- ISO/IEC JTC1 SC 36 Learning Technologies. Based on supporting
users with different Human Computer Interface needs and abilities access to
learning technologies.
- ISO/IEC JTC1 SC 25 WG 1 Home Electronic Systems. Based
on supporting users with different Human Computer Interface needs and abilities
access to home environmental controls, home appliances and home electronics.
- The Accessibility Working Group Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.
Common interest in the representation of accessibility needs and preferences
of individuals and the accommodation capabilities of intelligent devices
providing services.
- IEEE Web Engineering Best Practices Guideline (P2001). Based
on common interest in accessibility of data and information. The IEEE WEG
Committee has agreed to work jointly on Web accessibility needs and preferences
issues and vocabulary. We have established a formal liaison with this committee.
Internal (other INCITS Sub groups):
- L8 Metadata. Coordination and technical support and advice
on metadata related specifications used in the AIAP and other projects.
- M1 Biometrics. There is a common interest in the representation
of certain human user characteristics.
- T4 Security Techniques. There are a number of security and
privacy issues related to the deployment and use of the AIAP and other V2
specifications. We intend to request advice and support from T4 as
we consider these issues.
7. Membership and Officers
a. Officers:
| Position (and training date) |
Name and organization represented |
| Chair (10/01) |
Bill LaPlant, NIST (actually Census, until November,
2003, Consultant after October, 2003) |
| Vice Chair (9/02) |
Katie Haritos-Shea, CESSI Accessible Systems
|
| Secretary |
Joe Roeder, National Industries for the Blind |
| International Representative (7/03) |
Gottfried Zimmermann, Trace Center
|
| Vocabulary Representative |
Katie Haritos-Shea, CESSI Accessible Systems |
b. Membership:
Altarum Institute (Advisory)
AFB
AT&T
CESSI Accessible Systems
Dept. of Commerce
Free Desktop Software Working Group
Freedom Scientific
IBM
International Center for Disability Resources on the Internet
MICROSOFT (Advisory)
Madentec
National Industries for the Blind
ORACLE (Advisory)
Panasonic USA
Rehabilitative Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Communication
Enhancement
RERC on Wireless Technologies
SUN Microsystems
The MITRE Corp. (Advisory)
TRACE Center, U of Wisconsin
Unisys Corporation
XEROX (Advisory)
Liaison Members (3)
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative
IEEE Project 1621, IEEE Standard for User Interface Elements
in Power Control of Electronic Devices Employed in Office/Consumer Environments
ISO/IEC JTC1 SC 36 Learning Technologies
Internal to INCITS
L8 Metadata
M1 Biometrics
T4 Security Techniques
8. Future Trends and Related Technical
Activities
There already exists a burgeoning market for personalization of content
and appearance on the World Wide Web for small handheld devices and for commercial
sales purposes. Companies such as IBM, ATG, Macromedia, Adobe, and Vignette,
among many others, have products and services for this explicit purpose.
This market is expected to continue to grow considerably in the next 2 to
3 years. There is also a movement in the Web to provide sites
of interest to people with disabilities (e.g., HalfthePlanet, WeMedia, CanDo)
and the aging population (e.g., SeniorNet, AARP), and attempts to bring the
W3C WAI recommendations into these. Alternative interfaces to meet
these needs, whether pre-constructed, adapted or constructed on the fly,
are a form of personalization. Several other countries (particularly
the European Union) have incorporated requirements for accessibility by both
the aging population and people with disabilities including cognitive limitations.
Another rapidly emerging segment of technology is that of pervasive
computing, whereby intelligent devices of all sorts are distributed into
the living environments of home, shopping, and other activities involving
mobile systems. Of particular note are the numerous offerings in:
- Unified messaging/mobile computing (eFax, Hotmail), providing a central
information net-access point for one's messaging needs;
- Net-based information stores for people's core documents/pictures
(Freespace, Apple iTools);
- Transcoding/reformatting services for various devices (Everypath,
YahooMobile, IBM);
- Home automation & multi-access point management (Sony, Echelon,
Microsoft, IBM);
- Personalization of content & related marketing data (Vignette,
NetPerceptions);
- Personal, organizational, and business calendaring, synchronization,
and scheduling.
This follows the expansion of wireless technology from companies such as
Qualcomm, Nokia, Ericsson, Docomo, and Motorola, to mention but a few, as
well as activities such as the Wireless Application Protocol Forum (WAPForum)
and the Salutation Consortium in promoting applications for wireless devices.
Handheld devices such as the 3Com Palm and the Pocket PC are targeted at
the mobile computing environment. Other important factors in the wireless
environment are the Bluetooth RF and the Wi Fi Alliance (IEEE 802.11 based)
infrastructures for which a very substantial numbers of manufacturers are
building compatible devices.
The International Standards community is creating gateway standards
for many of the home-based and consumer technologies through the work of ISO/IEC
JTC1 SC25 WG1 (Home Electronic Systems).
Whereas these services look towards increasing access for user's
critical information, they rely on end-users to configure, change, or maintain
configurations for their access. In addition, the burden
of incorporating multiples of these offerings into a daily regimen is taxing
on the user, and certainly highly error-prone. The key shortfall, however,
rests in the personalization of the user's interaction with each of these
separate systems, and the changes and dynamics that individual users' will
need to effectively coordinate and use these services effectively.
This can be made especially difficult for a user with a disability or who
is aging.
To make these systems truly usable, service providers must bridge
the user's networks (office, mobile, home); the user's devices (phone, web-pad,
computer); and the user's information spaces and channels (email, documents,
news/information, calendars).
Key to interaction across devices and information spaces is the
ability to provide a ubiquitous user interface. Two related initiatives
are needed:
- Spreading the user preferences and needs throughout devices and information
systems via involvement by system-on-a-chip manufacturers, device manufacturers,
and implementors of mobile code technology.
- Appending additional services onto application servers or platforms
to provide a richer, personalized user experience.
The AIAP is seen as the integrating factor for these initiatives.
Moreover, the AIAP will be a major factor in providing preference and capability
transfer in non-networked, non-mobile uses as well. The Composite Capabilities
and Preferences Profiles (CC/PP) and Device Independence efforts at the W3C
is aimed at standard representations of the capabilities and preferences
of users and devices. The Open Mobile Alliance (formerly the WAPForum)
has been using the CC/PP to describe the features and capabilities of some
wireless devices such as smart phones.
Moreover, there is an abundant market for third-party developers
to build products that will carry out interface transformations for content,
appearance and user controls and to build applications that lend themselves
to interface selection or transformation. This trend is reinforced
by networking technologies such as Universal Plug and Play, Jini (Sun),
or HAVi, which provide a platform for discovery and control in a network
of devices and services. V2 is making sure that these technologies
can be harnessed for implementing its standard.
The AIAP is also being seen as part of the solution for responding
to the Access Board procurement standards for electronic and information
technology, pursuant to the provisions of Section 508 of the 1998 amendments
to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Thus, some equipment procured by
the Government could have the AIAP specified as meeting some of the requirements
of the 508 procurement standards.
Numbers from analysts range up to 1 billion wireless devices shipped
by 2004; 10 million digital homes by 2004; and 41 million telecommuting/
SOHO workers by 2003. The total addressable market of an enabling technology
such as interaction personalization can be estimated at 100 million people
in North America & Europe within 3 years. Related investments in
wireless data, personalization, and unified services are in the multi-billion
dollar area. There are 70 million adults aged 50+; this is expected
to grow to 115 million in the next 25 years. Of the present 70 million,
13 million have Internet access (SeniorNet and Charles Schwab), or 16.5% of
total online population, and they spend 30 hours per month online, 47% higher
than the national average. A significant portion of these users has
difficulty in using a mouse and navigating the Web, and operating other applications.
About 8% of the total U. S. population has a disability that limits their
ability to use a computer or to have effective access to the Internet.
People with disabilities are under-represented in the work force and make
up a considerable portion of the population that is at low-income levels.
9. Other Administrative
Information
V2 has no funds collection.
V2 has no written procedures for meeting or other committee activities.
|