Re: "Greater Accessibility for Voters with Disabilities"

From: Richard C. Johnson <dick_at_iwwco_dot_com>
Date: Tue Oct 31 2006 - 14:03:31 CST

Ed,
   
  I am much more keen on combinations of sip/puff, voice, and touch screen than the non-electronic tactile methods. I think they are a good choice when you need a short term solution for one or two elections until something better is available. Longer term, many people lacking either sight or hearing may not be able to use anything else; then, this is a good choice. Otherwise, if physical motion is possible, the 3-way combo of sip/puff, voice, and/or touch screen seems like a better goal. Right now, we have a design (not yet implemented) for a ballot writer with all three forms of access for less than $1,500 and which can seamlessly integrate with ordinary precinct scanners.
   
  Cheers!
   
  -- Dick

"Edmund R. Kennedy" <ekennedyx@yahoo.com> wrote:
  Hello:

Read and be prepared to respond.

Here's a good source for information on tactile ballots which are a good counter argument.

-- 
Thanks, Ed Kennedy
10777 Bendigo Cove
San Diego, CA 92126-2510 
858-578-8842
Work for the common good.
My profile: 
I blog now and then at: 
_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss

==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue Oct 31 23:17:09 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 31 2006 - 23:17:10 CST