Three links to aid in navigating the Web version of this document are:
These names were taken from the meeting sign-up sheet and may only be a partial list of the public participants at the conference.
Although these notes may appear to be verbatim, they are a summary document, not a transcript of the proceedings. Statements are attributed to particular Committee members and visitors to reflect the diversity of views present at the meeting, but should not be considered their exact wording.
Bonnie Jones: There's a national urgency to close the achievement gap, and technology will help this happen. We feel that NIMAS can play an important role in providing for greater access to the curriculum and assuring a free appropriate public education. As an update on work at OSEP on NIMAS, we received well over 5,000 public comments on IDEA 2004 and they are now being read and synthesized to help develop final regulations. Of course, not all of these were on NIMAS requirements. Currently, and as part of the State Application for IDEA Part B funds, States must respond to the NIMAS and the NIMAC assurances (Assurances 24a and 24b(1) & (2)), even though final regulations are not yet published. Part B State applications are due April 21, 2006. Through the Part B Applications, OSEP will be able to track progress of the NIMAS adoption by States and whether or not States will be coordinating with NIMAC. The NIMAS Development and Technical Assistance Centers' work on NIMAS is vital to the successful implementation of NIMAS and their use of advisory committees to gain input and seek feedback is critical to its effective implementation. Thank you for your commitment to this advisory committee work.
Chuck Hitchcock: We're working on keeping the NIMAS website up to date. We have a DAISY 2 and a DTB3 version of a NIMAS exemplar that we'll be posting soon. We just got permission from a publisher to post a chapter of a textbook. We've also posted our recommended update to the NIMAS Technical Specification—it's not official, but we think it'll be very close to the official posting. It includes the DAISY/NISO 2005 standard. There is a FAQ posted on the website, which is a stripped down version of the extended FAQ that you have in your handout folders. This extended version is not official, because it's not yet vetted by OSEP. On our technical assistance plate are workflows that are not yet completed, additional discussion about student-ready delivery, and the tools that are available to bring this up to date. We're thinking of creating something called "The NIMAS News" and we'll need your input. We'd also like to create something called "Background Knowledge" for new visitors to the website (with answers to questions like "What is XML?"). We're hoping to push forward with the market model; we think there is a legitimate commercial alternative workflow. We need to have a conversation about what these for-sale versions would look like.
David Rose: Student-ready versions are what we're really after and the NIMAS is the first step in that direction. [Committee member introductions]
Skip Stahl: Our goal today is to see if there's consensus on any of four issues: the status of the NIMAC, the provision of images, what content is included in the NIMAS, and interim solutions for math and science. We're going to try to move this agenda forward. This is a consensus building group and consensus is a method for addressing complex multiparty disputes. This is not a voting group, it's a group that comes together with a commitment to reach agreement. We ask you to approach this process with a range of interests rather than a fixed position. This is not the most efficient or cleanest process, but I believe it's the most effective because everyone gives input.
Julia Myers: In December 2004, APH discovered we were named as the home of the NIMAC. We've been working with the DOE to clarify how this center will run. We've been working with a consultant and with vendors to determine how to operate the NIMAS. We've formed and expanded an advisory council for the NIMAC. We don't yet have the procedures for the NIMAC's operation nailed down yet, but we're close; I can't talk about it yet because it's not final. We've just chosen Overdrive, Inc. (
www.overdrive.com) as the vendor to operate the NIMAC delivery system. They have the background and capacity to do this and currently work with more than four hundred publishers. They already have some tried and true technology in place that provides security and capacity and can have systems in place for us to test by the summer. We haven't finalized our agreement with the DOE for funds to pay for this, but that should happen soon. There are still some outstanding issues, but we are moving forward. We need to know what the solution is for image files so we can work that into our system. At our pace we should be ready by December. The APH website (www.aph.org) now has a link that provides info about the NIMAC.
Jessica Brodey: We looked at the website and have some concerns and questions about some of the materials posted there. Is there an opportunity for us to submit concerns to APH?
Julia Myers: You can submit anything directly to me.
Mary Platner: In Arizona, we have adopted the NIMAS, can we access the NIMAC?
Julia Myers: We will be coming out with an acceptable usage policy soon. Right now we're operating within the confines of the legislation, which provides a definition of "students with print disabilities."
Skip Stahl: The 1931 Act for the Blind (later the Chafee amendment) limits the access to materials to a particular group of students with disabilities. This presents a challenge because some states' laws (Arizona, Kentucky) go beyond this federal definition. There is not a clear solution to this problem. One solution would be legislating, but the market model could work as well. We don't have a definitive response right now.
Mary Platner: Just to reassure the publishers—we're not looking for a freebie. The law is now mandating inclusion and we need to be able to support those teachers and their students.
Chuck Mayo: The Texas law also allows the use of materials for all students.
Jim Fruchterman: I hope that if the publisher agrees to allow a state to access its files at the NIMAC, that the NIMAC will allow that to happen. Publishers and states will be signing contracts about this. Julia, could you list what outstanding information you need to settle everything?
Julia Myers: From this committee, it's the question of the format of the image file. This will help us set up a validation system.
Susan Christensen: We're going to need the opportunity to test the files to create tools for braille software. Will we be able to gain access to files this summer for testing?
Julia Myers: We'll only be giving files to authorized users. Perhaps this would be possible through publishers.
David Rose: We are anticipating some clarification of definitions from OSEP. Bonnie, is there a way for people to comment on this to you?
Bonnie Jones: Actually, the official comment period has closed.
Jessica Brodey: The Blind Act is not limited to blind students. It's open to interpretation and a wide range of students fall into that definition.
James Pritchett: Will there be testing of the quality and conformance of the files (in addition to XML validation)? This is a really tough test to do. Is this issue still on the table and being considered?
George Kerscher: If we do it upfront it won't have to happen again and again and have to be fixed by each recipient of the files (everyone will have to have quality assurance).
Julia Myers: No, it will be an automatic check. We won't have the means to do that level of quality check. The XML and Dublin Core metadata will be validated. We won't have what we'd need to be able to go beyond that. We're trying to expedite the delivery process.
James Pritchett: I would encourage you to think about a feedback process from the field back to the NIMAC so that the correct file can replace the erroneous file.
Julia Myers: Yes, that will be possible.
Chuck Hitchcock: DAISY offers structure guidelines to help you develop a good XML file. We're working with a subset of that. Julia, I agree with your response. We expect that the publishers' files will be high quality.
Charlene Gaynor: Once the file has been delivered to the NIMAC, it will made available to any authorized user, not just the contractee. Is that correct?
Julia Myers: Yes, but the authorized groups will be tightly controlled. The number of qualifying students will be very small. Also, presumably a print version of the textbook has been purchased by the school or district for that qualifying student. The school will probably be going to the student-ready version provided directly, not to the NIMAC.
Jessica Brodey: I'm concerned about LEAs only getting access to files if their states have opted in. We need to think about this and what it means.
Julia Myers: Allan Adler, Rick Ferrie, and other publishers can help us with sample files for testing.
Mary Ann Siller: We have a process for testing files thanks to George Kerscher. It is important to test along the way.
George Kerscher: The feedback loop is important and we need to make sure that the loop is consistent between the braille and other organizations, so we're not giving publishers contradictory information.
Chuck Mayo: I recommend that we be sensitive to corrections and changes, because in the real world there are a lot of errors in textbooks.
Julia Myers: The publisher sends the file that is NIMAS-conformant; there is nothing in the legislation that says the publisher has to send a new file with every new printing.
Allan Adler: Sometimes there are late changes and that creates difficulties. All students face the same problems of whether or not their textbook reflects what is accurate.
Chuck Mayo: Braille transcribers are some of the best at getting the information correct.
Jim Fruchterman: Our service is not free and so there is a disadvantage, but one way or another it is important that those students get served. There is a gap between what you can automate and assess.
Ruth Ziolkowski: The issue of quality is that you want to make sure that students get what is right, because teachers won't know. There needs to be a feedback loop or something.
Julia Myers: These are source files that are not going to teachers.
Deborah Buck: Is there intent to provide sample contract language for states with issues and considerations? Are files being treated equitably?
Chuck Hitchcock: No, another level to deal with first is to figure out do they get cooperation from LEAs and they need to understand their role in this. We've never provided sample language and we can do that. We're trying to get some consistency so all states have similar guidance.
Allan Adler: There will be a baseline date that can be referred to.
Mary Platner: Publishers' websites for students using online books who fall under Chafee are kept up to date. Is the upkeep of the LOUIS list federally funded? If they expand "print disabilities," then would LOUIS include alternate formats?
Julia Myers: The LOUIS list is part federally funded; it is paid for out of the annual appropriations to APH. We're looking at trying to find a mechanism to automate and track in LOUIS.
Rick Bowes: Overdrive distributes materials in a reasonable manner—will they also act as a converter?
Julia Myers: We're talking to them about the NIMAC and the role of the NIMAC is to be the central repository. We want them to help us create that.
George Kerscher: Overdrive produces a market-ready version—that's a good way to get to a market model very easily.
Skip Stahl: There are some students who are print-disabled but can see visual images and there's been an agreement that images should be included for them. In June 2003, there was a general understanding that perhaps the publishers would provide full page PDFs to give creators an idea of how to create files for students. Since 2003 there's been many changes in the market, like Google Print. There's no such thing as complete DRM. There's been a lot of discussion in the last two plus years over this topic. Rick Ferrie suggested in September that we have JPEGs in folders that are linked to references to the images in the XML. There were concerns that PDF images would be files that are much too large. In the actual regulations relating to the statute, it says that publishers will provide PDFs with embedded images. This language was taken from the NFF report. I am going to suggest that there be a PDF that is a list of the images that will be provided in a folder, so that we conform to the language in the statute.
Rick Ferrie: The reason to do this is to avoid having to rewrite the statute, correct?
Skip Stahl: Yes. I'm offering a compromise. I'm just throwing this out as a possibility.
George Kerscher: I'm not sure I understand what you're proposing. There could be many images per page, some of which don't have instructional content. We want the images that are important. I think the reason we'd want a PDF would be so that we could decide which images to include.
Skip Stahl: We never came to a full resolution regarding images.
Jim Fruchterman: I would rather have full-page PDFs. If I can't get that I would rather leave it up to the publisher to decide what to provide, because I think many publishers already have the full page PDFs and would provide those because it would be easier. I think that would be better than a manifest.
Rick Ferrie: The consensus from the publishers is that they would not provide unlocked PDFs.
George Kerscher: Jim, why do you still want the full page PDFs if we have the JPEGs?
Skip Stahl: The publishers are offering to do more work to create the JPEG folders because they're more comfortable with that than having the PDFs floating out there.
Allan Adler: Publishers view the PDFs as an accessible format, even if there's disagreement over that.
Dave Schleppenbach: The publishers are doing more work by identifying the locations of the images. They are also identifying which images go where, i.e. which images have content and which don't. That should be very useful to the authorized entity doing the conversion.
Rick Ferrie: It might be easier for publishers to deal with these issues than others.
Dave Schleppenbach: I think publishers would err on the side of putting too many images in. No one will use a PDF manifest.
John Gardner (visitor, Oregon State University): JPEG isn't an XML format. I think you should give publishers the option of giving you images in an XML format (SVG). SVG is almost trivial to make accessible and JPEG is a lot harder.
Dave Schleppenbach: I don't think the actual format is decided yet.
George Kerscher: SVG is supported in the standard and would be preferred. If we could get it, that would be great. The missing piece is you don't know how to do a description of an image without its context. We'd never distribute the PDF but just use it for production purposes.
Steve Noble: We're trying to get as streamlined a process as possible before a student even requests a file. We don't want the delay and cost of the production facility needing to purchase a hard copy of the textbook in order to create the image descriptions. Locks on the PDFs would make them inaccessible and someone with a disability working at a production facility would not be able to use them.
Chuck Hitchcock: We don't think most publishers are ready for an XML workflow without a lot of change. Our exemplars currently posted have JPEGs in a folder included. It allows for a very nice rendering of the file. The only things missing are the alt. descriptions. If we had 72 dpi images, would we want them in chapter folders or grouped otherwise?
Rick Ferrie: We're not going to have them all in one big folder—there will be some structure.
Dave Schleppenbach: The way the process now works with authorized entities is that the publisher sends a hard copy of the book to the authorized entity associated with the state that contracted for it. What about shifting the burden of determining the format to the contractees (publisher, SEA/LEA, and authorized entity)?
Skip Stahl: The NIMAS Centers have a responsibility to address language that we suggested to the DOE that will be included in the regulations. We need to address the phrase "PDF with embedded images" in the statute. The manifest/index is my suggestion for meeting that language.
Jim Fruchterman: We like PDFs because we have digital workflows and we want to do quality control that you can't do that without a copy of the print book. And we don't want the files locked because we need to use them to create tactile graphics.
Larry Skutchan: Most locked PDFs are accessible.
George Kerscher: My screen reader can access locked content, though it might not read it correctly. We can live with locked because we're not delivering it to the end user.
Steve Noble: There are different degrees of "locked." As long as you all agree that you can live with that that's okay for me.
Rick Ferrie: The Braille transcriber folks wanted a physical copy of the book. Also, I heard a "no" to locked PDFs. Publishers would reconsider that if it were on the table.
Julia Myers: Also note that IDEA 2004 added large print to Chaffee and we need to be sure the image resolution is sufficient for large print.
Susan Christensen: Would it work for people if the PDF was unprintable?
George Kerscher: I think 90% of the time, RFB&D would want the hard copy if available, but we'd want to be as efficient as possible and this could take a while to get.
Jim Fruchterman: Nancy Niebrugge doesn't want 72 dpi. We don't want to deny anyone a hard copy, but we want to be able to work without it. I support providing both formats.
Rick Ferrie: The publishers are not going to support both.
Mary Ann Siller: It's important to be able to access the multiple layers of the images. It's unreliable to use the locked PDF images. There is great benefit to unlocked image files (JPEGs) for tactile graphics production.
Charlene Gaynor: I don't understand the braille translation process—is that a one-time transaction between the brailler and publisher?
Susan Christensen: If I have to choose between PDF and images, I'm going for images. So many textbooks are image-intensive today. If you look at LOUIS, some books have been done ten times. Braille textbooks sometimes cost $15,000, so often volunteers or schools redo it instead of buying them. It's not just being produced once and that's it. Once these files come out there will be major shifts in the braille production community.
Jessica Brodey: I think ATIA would prefer both formats, but since that's not possible, we'd prefer the images in a folder, because that's more useful for the widest range of people. Many schools will just slap a style sheet on top of an XML file.
George Kerscher: RFB&D would prefer images over PDFs, but we need to make sure that our students can use those images—they must be high quality.
Rick Ferrie: We need to take a first step. SVG has great promise but I don't think the tools are there yet. We need to give it a shot now, the technology will change this. For small publishers this will create a great burden for them.
Chuck Hitchcock: I favor the images in the folders because the reference to the location is there. We can come back later and ask for locked and reduced PDFs.
Rick Ferrie: The publishing lawyers are tense right now and just need to see this in action as see what happens.
Mary Ann Siller: Some of the images are coupled with text. Would that be part of the image or the text?
George Kerscher: The caption would live in the image area.
Mary Ann Siller: Is this discussion still on the table?
Skip Stahl: In September it seemed that 72 dpi was the consensus.
Mary Ann Siller: For peelable layers it would need to be higher, more like 300 dpi. How much difference is JPEG versus TIFF?
Skip Stahl: I'd like us to think about this and we'll continue discussing it in tomorrow's Technology Subgroup.
[LUNCH BREAK]
David Rose: What constitutes the content that NIMAS needs to address? What are the core instructional areas? We look to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), 1965.
Jessica Brodey: That's not what the statute points to.
Jose Blackorby: The diversity of topics presents a range of problems for different kids. The use of symbols in math and science will present issues. The use of images varies by subject.
Jim Fruchterman: Music is not on this list of subjects.
David Rose: Could that be part of Arts?
Dave Schleppenbach: Is there any future work that could be done in any of these areas that would enhance their accessibility, like for math.
George Kerscher: How would we synchronize tactile graphics for these subjects? Like a talking tactile map.
David Rose: Clearly music brings up issues for deaf individuals and we're tending to think of it from a visual point of view.
Dave Schleppenbach: We don't have a lot of feedback from mobility impaired persons.
Rich Robison: In IDEA 2004 Congress specifically referenced this passage (of ESEA).
David Rose: Textbooks are not a great device for teaching everyone and are not great for some subject areas. As we extend the NIMAS to different subject areas, the method of instruction will change and the disability group affected will shift.
Michael Wehmeyer: The NIMAS doesn't say anything about core academic content. It should apply to any subject.
David Rose: It is interesting to think about who decides what is core. A state can decide, the publisher can decide to market their program as core, a school district can decide, an individual school might decide, an individual teacher might decide. There's no clear sense of who has the authority. For a student, it is the teacher's decision that matters. The language for the NIMAS states what materials are included. There are even more materials than ever that are used for instruction, like websites. "Printed textbooks" doesn't capture this fully. What does "related print instructional materials" mean? And "for use by students in the classroom" is an interesting phrase too. It's clear that printed textbooks are part of this definition. Ada Sullivan (of CAST) includes the workbook, practice book, and test materials. She explicitly leaves teacher's editions out of this. It's hard to imagine a publisher now that doesn't do multimedia. But the definition in IDEA 2004 specifies printed materials—so we're restricted for the moment.
Joy Zabala (visitor, AT & Leadership): Specific instructional materials are not referenced in the IEP for a student.
David Rose: This is from the general education instructional plan, not an IEP.
Bonnie Jones: David, could you expand on the role of state standards in this process? Teachers are guided by those standards and their instructional plan is aligned to them.
David Rose: It's a standards-driven system. This is a big change. Now publishers need to deliver results based on standards. They used to just deliver books.
Dave Schleppenbach: Workbooks and tests are interactive. That's something that's a work in progress, like math. We could find an interim solution if we considered these materials in a non-interactive way.
David Rose: In a results-based system, you need to practice for mastery and it's not enough to not interact. Practice is more central. Highly interactive multimedia programs are making the most money. In a standard-based world, assessments guide instruction—much more a part of the curriculum.
Dena Greene (visitor, Macmillan/McGraw Hill): How would you treat leveled readers?
David Rose: Leveled readers are very standard now.
Visitor: Schools have to braille workbooks locally because they can't get that anywhere else. Textbooks are easier to come by.
Chuck Mayo: Sometimes workbooks are part of the student package and are core, not supplemental. Publishers will often a variety of permutations of materials. This makes these definitions meaningless.
Charlene Gaynor: We call "supplementals" everything but textbooks. If you can figure out how to define this, you will have done something that no one else could do. There are a lot of definitions out there. You want to take an inclusive approach to provide files to as many students as possible. There are many definitions that are absolutely contrary to this, though.
David Rose: The supplementals more urgently address the needs of the atypical student, so not having those materials covered would be disastrous.
Charlene Gaynor: True, but some definitions disqualify them for federal funding, so that's a problem too.
Allan Adler: The point is to get materials delivered to students as quickly as possible. This process has been overtaken by events and by technology.
David Rose: We are hoping that we will learn to do this with traditional textbooks, but it would be a mistake to not plan ahead for other types of materials. We don't want to be left behind as "the textbook people."
Allan Adler: Agreed. It would be nice if the publishers could decide on a definition of core instructional materials.
David Rose: For many publishers, assessments are more urgent because the stakes are higher and the potential for lawsuits is greater.
[Discussion of these issues continues in the Pedagogy Subgroup.]
Steve Noble: Accessibility will hopefully help us close the achievement gap. Accessibility is a two-fold issue: there's the technology and the public policy angle (what are the motivations for accessibility? It's intersection with civil rights legislation?). Why is math accessibility important? Students in U.S. schools do not fare well when compared with the rest of the industrialized world. It is even worse for students with disabilities—the math achievement gap is wide. The vast majority of math instructional materials and assessments are inaccessible. We have to work on this disparity. MathML is a key component of math accessibility. We need to get everyone to support it.
Dave Schleppenbach: Math is not specifically included in the current math specification—there is not a way to encode math symbols. There is an interim solution for publishers now, which is to use images to treat math concepts. During the value-add step there can be text or audio descriptions added. In braille, the Nemeth code can be used to represent equations. There is a lot of cumbersomeness to this process and it's not an ideal long-term goal. Offering descriptions is time-consuming and complicated, which means a delay in getting materials to students. Also, students cannot modify the description to their liking—they have to take what they get. There are limitations on how the image can actually be used.
Rick Ferrie: We need to have a way to explain the interim process to LEAs and SEAs in December, when the NIMAC goes online.
Dave Schleppenbach: Absolutely, it needs to be fleshed out more. The post-interim solution is an XML math mark-up language like MathML. We want to be able to present the equations alongside text. Even in the lower grade levels this is a challenge. Long division is hard to present non-visually. Dynamic content would allow for fine-grained exploration, which would allow for better understanding and comprehension of the material. Descriptions of the math could be automatically generated; this is an area where a lot of work has already been done. A math extension to DAISY could be helpful and there's a working group exploring this. The results from this group will be a good example of the creation of modular extensions (with possible implications for music, etc.). Almost all of the DAISY MathML working group will be at the ATIA conference. Not all players will be able to understand this markup, and we will make it such that those players will not crash but will just skip over this content. MathML has an extension group element that functions like an image group element, so this makes the interim solution of using images for math language directly compatible with the new solution. There are four rendering options: mathml-native, mathml-for-visual, mathml-for-audio, mathml-no-support (skips MathML elements). One of the most difficult problems is confronting upright problems (like long division). This is a weakness that is currently being worked on. The math specification will not be part of the Zed2005 specification. We hope to have the formal technical specification done by this spring, to be followed by a public review process. And hopefully it would be ready for the next version of Zed. This will not be ready for December 2006.
Rick Ferrie: This also has to be worked into the publishers' workflows, so there will be an additional delay on top of those steps.
Dave Schleppenbach: Yes, good point. Also, MathML is robust enough to support symbology and includes Unicode, which is an international symbols standard. DAISY currently supports Unicode, but it can't always be rendered.
Susan Christensen: I've seen Unicode symbols in math files, so some publishers are already using them.
Dave Schleppenbach: So how does this affect NIMAS? For many print disabled students, audio is the only method to access math. This is challenging because math is very visual and multi-dimensional. Given that there is no standard way to speak math, what do we do? Fortunately we have some solutions. MathSpeak allows students to disambiguate between similarly spoken formulas. There are a lot of exhibitions and talks at ATIA about math accessibility.
George Kerscher: We really need players that support interaction based on MathML. The navigation of mathematics is critical. We have three different player options: (1) not visually presented, but audio/tactile presentation, (2) visual but no audio/tactile, (3) both. (3) is the goal (universal design). We're working on this.
Robert Smith (visitor, Aequus): Can you speak about the navigation model?
George Kerscher: This will be up to groups that provide interfaces, but there could be keystrokes assigned to different navigation tasks. The specification does not define the navigation interface, which is why it's up to the individual companies. There will be a lot of innovation to deal with the complicated navigation necessary for math.
Robert Smith: Will you tackle the vertical (upright math problems) issues?
Dave Schleppenbach: MathML was coded to allow this, but doesn't have vertical problems in mind. A lot of this will be player-dependent.
Susan Christensen: Some of these issues are appearing in all textbooks. Bits and pieces of math are showing up across the subject areas.
Jim Fruchterman: Does this interim solution bury the math in a box that the user's player does not recognize?
George Kerscher: The image and prodnote are already supported and the SMIL support would point back to these tags. An intelligent player should be able to recognize this. This will cause a problem unless the player used is updated (DAISY 2005 and forward) and supports XML natively.
Jose Blackorby: Across disability categories there is a wide range of math scores. They do far better on calculation than on problem solving. Have you had to confront this at all?
Dave Schleppenbach: This is really a matter of decoupling the semantics from the method of presentation. Some of those issues are beyond the scope of this.
Mary Platner: Would typical text-to-speech players, including freeware, be able to use this?
Dave Schleppenbach: The interim solution is an image with a text description, which would be supported. The burden is on the value-add stage to do this properly. This approach has weaknesses. It assumes that the value-adder will have a hard copy of the book. This shouldn't be a problem for the value-adders because they do this for non-math images. RFB&D, for examples, already has a protocol for doing this.
Chris von See (visitor, TechAdapt): I think it's a huge assumption that everyone has the expertise to do this.
Dave Schleppenbach: That's true, but I don't know of any other solution that will be ready in time for the NIMAS other than looking to existing standards like MathSpeak, which is publicly available.
Jim Fruchterman: Just saying that the NIMAS files won't be used by students directly, doesn't mean that it won't be used that way.
Rick Bowes: I'm thinking about who's getting the NIMAS files without time pressure. This will be lost on unsophisticated agencies.
Susan Christensen: Once MathML is ready, will it be part of the baseline NIMAS or the optional NIMAS?
Skip Stahl: I don't know the answer to that now. The NIMAS is trying to align itself as closely to DAISY as possible.
Rick Ferrie: I think the market will eventually make it such that it can't be optional.
[BREAK]
Pearce McNulty (visitor, Aequus): Our work on the NFF was predicated on the assumption that the market would not respond to the needs of such a small groups (students with physical disabilities, less than 1%) and that therefore legislation was needed. But now with learning disabilities in NIMAS' purview, there is a real market and market forces should be used because they're most efficient. The NIMAS is not right for this larger group and the market will incentivize publishers to create higher quality products. The goal is to improve learning outcomes, not to get freebies from publishers.
George Kerscher: Next month at the DAISY board meeting we'll be talking about moving this into the mainstream. I think the publishing community will be supportive of a non-proprietary format for sale on the open market.
Skip Stahl: Rick Ferrie, could you comment on what are some of the challenges perceived by the publishing community as obstacles for creating a market model?
Rick Ferrie: There are established processes at the state and local level and publishers would need to figure out how to actually sell this product. One of the big problems is digital rights management (DRM). There's a basic struggle over the value of something distributed digitally. It's harder to control your product. When you don't know how often your file is accessed you tend to either set the price very high or say you won't do it. We're all waiting for the first unfortunate legal action to set a precedent on this. As long as there is a population under dispute it's difficult to figure out what to do. As long as there's an exemption and controversy over the market size of that exemption it's hard to get publishers to act.
Allan Adler: Another problem is that if the general market changes so that people with no disabilities start to prefer digital books over print ones, and we've already given away many digital books for free to Chafee students, and we've created a dual universe. There's fear over doing this.
Rick Ferrie: I fear that we're spending a lot of time making textbooks accessible when we're simultaneously debating whether or not the book is the right format for instruction to begin with.
Charlene Gaynor: This is an incredible time for publishing. The transition from print to technology is difficult and the stakes are huge. For supplemental publishers there is a totally different business model; adapting is our competitive strength.
David Rose: The movement will move from content to pedagogy. Print is not a good technology to achieve results. Kids who have had trouble learning will be teaching us how to do this. We are exploring using the market model. NIMAS 2.0 will be about how to teach students to problem solve. Legislation is not our main driver anymore.
Rich Robison: The educational environment is different than ten years ago. The high stakes are the kids themselves and their futures. The law is still pushing us forward.
Jim Fruchterman: People are still scanning books today. If there was a real market today it would be filled. I don't believe that Chafee is the reason there isn't a model. It costs a lot of money to serve the Chafee population, which is why it's mandated. I hope that the publishers that experiment the soonest make the most money.
David Rose: The money flow is not universally designed. The special education and general education monies are separate.
Skip Stahl: Although we've brought up a lot of issues that haven't been resolved, this was very organic and we can return to these issues tomorrow.
Skip Stahl: I'm going to ask each of the subgroups to tackle one or more of the issues brought up yesterday. We intend to schedule the next meeting in Dallas for the second week in September. I'll get those dates ASAP.
Skip Stahl: The braille community raised some issues in Dallas about how the NIMAS might be a step backwards for them. It is important that they feel part of this process. In December we coordinated two conference calls for members of the committee with expertise in braille and other braille experts. We developed a series of recommendations from the subgroup to the NIMAS Committee. The first recommendation is about Unicode.
Jim Fruchterman: This is something we're already doing, it's part of XML.
Susan Christensen: Some publishers are more creative with their coding. This is just a declaration for the newer players to know what we're expecting.
Skip Stahl: I don't think Unicode was mentioned specifically in the NIMAS, except where the NIMAS points back to DAISY.
Bob Stepp (visitor, CASC): Special symbols should be treated as characters rather than as entities.
Dave Schleppenbach: As publishers move more towards XML-based production tools, these problems should disappear.
Susan Christensen: Because every print page may be equivalent to numerous pages of braille, it's absolutely necessary to for us to indicate each print page break. If you look at textbooks, it's not uncommon to have pages without the actual page numbers on them. We want to make sure that the page number is indicated no matter what. This is important for braille, but for all other users too.
Skip Stahl: I'm assuming that this is supported by DAISY.
George Kerscher: That is correct.
Rick Ferrie: So these are things that are in the specification that we want to emphasize to make sure they happen?
Skip Stahl: Yes.
Dave Schleppenbach: Going back to the first resolution, some symbols, like dashes (em dash and en dash) need to be used consistently, that's pretty important.
Susan Christensen: Very few publishers have consistently used page breaks for those pages without an actual number. This wasn't a problem for automated braille production until we started getting files from the publishers.
Rick Ferrie: Publishers' XML workflow should help solve this.
Visitor: Is there a standard rule of thumb for a hyphenated word in the midst of a page break?
Susan Christensen: Put the page break where it is and keep a hard hyphen in there. In terms of everything this isn't a big deal.
George Kerscher: For files just leave the page break where it is, there's no formatting decision to be made. This could be solved by a quality control that lists all of the pages and you could see which page numbers are missing.
Jim Fruchterman: Our experience with publishers is that page numbering is the one tag that they don't do.
Rick Ferrie: If this is in the specification it will be accounted for. This is relatively straightforward.
Susan Christensen: The next recommendation is about headings. The NIMAS shows six levels of heading and this was making transcribers nervous. People are concerned that the publishers accurately show the intent of the book without getting carried away. If it's more than six levels that's okay but it probably wouldn't work for the NIMAS. We don't want one hundred levels. This is mostly a reiteration that we want an accurate representation of what's in print. The next recommendation is for tables. Books these days are full of tables. If the tables are accurately done we can deal with them ok. Tables are critical for us because of what we have to do in braille. Without accurate representation, we're in trouble.
Rick Ferrie: I think the tables in general will be one of the greatest troubles for publishers because we have tables made graphically. I think it's going to be a challenge for them.
Skip Stahl: Susan created a very elegant document about table mark-up and we'll try to help publishers mark up content correctly.
Rick Ferrie: Before the NIMAS goes live we're going to need to get as many content types as possible as exemplars. In higher grades tables get more complicated.
Chris von See (visitor, TechAdapt): Is there a structure in place for getting this representative sample of the NIMAS material to others to look at.
Chuck Hitchcock: We've posted two exemplars and we're hoping to post additional ones.
Rick Ferrie: The publishers would love to get some samples up but don't want criticism for what they create, so they are reluctant at the moment.
Skip Stahl: We've had some submissions of exemplars and we do a second level of checking, but we don't want to post anything that isn't valid. We've actually sent back one exemplar that was non-conformant. You should tell the publishers that so they know what we want.
Chris von See (visitor, TechAdapt): Will there be a feedback loop in place for people who use the exemplar. If we have recommendations is there a mechanism for us to provide that feedback to you?
Chuck Hitchcock: Not all of our list-servs are currently up. I think we should create a list-serv specifically for that purpose—to give recommendations about the NIMAS. I'm going to have to find a way to vet that so that we don't confuse folks.
Rick Ferrie: We also want to make sure that the folks doing the mark up are happy with what they do.
George Kerscher: In the DAISY/NISO Standards Committee we've creating a tracking database and any issue found with the 2005 standard goes to the committee and gets resolved.
Ron Stewart: We asked the AAP to communicate our feedback to the publishers. We want all of the changes to ISBN numbers be available on publisher websites.
Skip Stahl: That's helpful to know.
Jessica Brodey: ATIA is also taking feedback, largely from members working with files. There's a way for us to filter feedback back as well. We encourage anyone, particularly those on the software side, to reach out to us.
Susan Christensen: The last recommendation is regarding tables of contents (TOCs). It's not just TOCs, but any structure with subentries.
Bob Stepp (visitor, CASC): The sample I saw showed the contents as a list. But this is the kind of thing that has special formatting in braille. Lacking an element to split the entry between the phrase and the page number is problematic. It is possible to make this automated by finding the white space, but that doesn't always happen anymore (leaving white space).
George Kerscher: David Holladay proposed markup specifically for TOC markup. It sounds like the sample you saw wasn't marked up correctly. We don't have a way of differentiating the TOC from other lists that look like it. Bob was suggesting a new class attribute for designating the TOC.
Rick Ferrie: So this issue is that you (Bob) are asking for tags that are optional that you want to be not optional.
Bob Stepp (visitor, CASC): Yes.
Rick Ferrie: What if we proposed some guideline in the specification (I think most publishers will follow the specification) that recommends using the optional elements.
Chuck Hitchcock: We're planning on putting together a short style guide where we could put this recommendation.
Skip Stahl: We will be looking back to the Committee to create language for this style guide.
Susan Christensen: I think it would be easy to create exemplars that will show what a TOC should look like.
George Kerscher: The problem is having an exemplar of the TOC that doesn't have the correct markup. Because the law says you don't have to use that element—that drives us crazy. Use the optional tags where appropriate. The exemplars should show what you should do.
Ron Stewart: And glossaries and indices are important too.
Skip Stahl: Would a strategy devised for TOCs work for those too?
Ron Stewart: Yes, we should do the same thing if we agree on something.
Jim Fruchterman: So we'll be saying that this is not part of the standard but that it's highly recommended that you use the following class attributes. Is that what we're saying?
Jessica Brodey: If we start putting class attributes in how will that affect the software that processes these files?
Susan Christensen: In terms of braille software there won't be a problem.
George Kerscher: This shouldn't be a problem. If the player is using a style sheet it shouldn't crash it. Anything that uses style sheets should use the class attribute. We could come up with a set of recommended class attributes that would differentiate headings (index from chapter headings, for example).
Chris von See (visitor, TechAdapt): I would like to caution that this may present a challenge in the future if someone is changing the class attribute to suit their particular style sheet.
George Kerscher: The point with class attributes is be consistent so that within that book you can use them. The technical committee could come up with a list of class attributes that could be used in the U.S. and we could put that out as a note.
Rick Ferrie: I'm starting to get a bit nervous. It's going to have to be explicit and clear what should happen. We can't have any ambiguity over this if we want the publishers to do it.
Skip Stahl: This isn't going to get solved today, but we should start the process of addressing this.
Chuck Hitchcock: We put up the exemplar in both the NIMAS (baseline set only) and the full DAISY. Perhaps we should put up an in-between version too—baseline NIMAS plus strongly recommended.
Dave Schleppenbach: It sounds like there's four issues preferable for braille transcription: demarcate page numbers, and use the correct class attributes to mark the TOC, glossary, and index.
Bob Stepp (visitor, CASC): There's a few other best practices like blocked versus unblocked paragraphs.
Susan Christensen: I'll choose my battles and I'm willing to put this (indented vs. blocked paragraph formatting) at the bottom of the list. But what Dave said will take care of a lot of our issues.
[BREAK FOR SUBGROUP MEETINGS]
Skip Stahl: The proposal from the Technology Subgroup is for images in a folder with placeholders in the XML pointing to their location. The image type preferred is SVG, next is PNG and JPEG (roughly equal). We want to be able to take an image and be able to double it without losing its quality. Each image should be rendered at 300 DPI and at physical dimensions equal to the print image. Since the physical dimensions of an image and its resolution are in direct proportion to one another, care will have to be taken to render NIMAS-related images accurately. This would facilitate the creation of tactile graphics and large print better than 72 dpi.
Dave Schleppenbach: We revisited the issue of the class attributes and additional tag either added to the baseline set or mentioned in a best practices documents. This issue will be revisited on the list-serv. And the MathML interim strategy of using images seemed also to be agreed to and will be revisited on the list-serv.
George Kerscher: We also decided to provide a PDF of the title page or whatever page definitively describes what book this is, to meet the PDF language in the statute—this was referred to as the metadata page.
Skip Stahl: Once a modular math extension is approved by DAISY we will refer that to this Committee to replace the interim strategy.
Julia Myers: You might want to submit an image (PDF) of the back cover of the book, which will provide the printing code or numbers and ISBN.
Dave Schleppenbach: We just want to make it a metadata file that will have the info we'll need. It doesn't matter which page it is, just that it has the right data on it.
George Kerscher: We should probably do a class attribute of math.
Rick Ferrie: There's still likely to be a lag for the publishers to do math once the extension is approved.
George Kerscher: There would have to be production tools and playback mechanisms that could utilize MathML or it won't be ready.
Dave Schleppenbach: Do we need to modify the package file to reference the new metadata PDF?
George Kerscher: The package file does not have a mechanism to reference the PDF.
Dave Schleppenbach: Let's refer this to the list-serv.
Larry Skutchan: Is there someplace else besides the PDF where all this metadata will be hosted?
Skip Stahl: Yes, this is all elsewhere.
Julia Myers: The NIMAC will have that metadata if we can get it from the publishers.
Chuck Hitchcock: This reminds me that there are some unresolved issues about the package file that the Technology Subgroup should work on on the list-serv.
Skip Stahl: I will write all of this up in a summary document and send it to the Technology subcommittee and then the Committee.
Chuck Hitchcock: I think we made the supplemental publishers think things were even more complicated.
Jessica Brodey: We hit on many different issues. Chuck said we should cover the opt-in issues and what state technical assistance should be. There's a lot of opt-in questions. There's some confusion—you can opt-in and do a market model, opt-in and go with the NIMAC, and opt-out and do your own thing. The LEAs don't submit forms to the government so there's some confusion there. What happens to LEAs with no state involvement? How the NIMAC will work might not work with how states are currently set up. We also have issues with dates: States have to adopt the NIMAS after the regulations are published, which they haven't been. If they're not published before Dec. 4 we'll have an even bigger problem. There's a potential clashing of the activation dates. Some of this happened because of last minute changes in the law. The next question we have is with respect to core materials. Our publishers pointed out that their 2006-7 copyrights are almost finished. They need to know now what “core materials” means so they can start acting on that now so they don't have to retroactively do that later. There's a gray area between core and supplemental. We need to figure this out quickly so that publishers can figure out their workflow. Allan Adler mentioned small publishers, which may or may not be members of AAP and know about NIMAS, and what they need to do. What kind of info will be provided to the LEAs and SEAs? How do we reach out to LEAs when they don't have a broader organization? We might create a letter explaining what this NIMAS is that will also provide purchase order language—but you don't want to be held accountable for that language if it turns out to work poorly for an education agency. We need to help states figure out what to do. While publishers may not technically be required to comply with the NIMAS before Dec. 4, they may have files ready for the NIMAC by then. But it could be a year or two before the right files are submitted. If some of the recommendations change the standard, publishers are not going to change the early versions that they've created if they're not legally obligated to. Texas expects to do their quality assurance before the files go to the NIMAC. When does the contract trigger take place? Some states do five year contracts and annual purchase agreements, both of which are triggers. In every state that trigger is going to be different. This all makes it more difficult to provide technical assistance to states. Bonnie was going to share technical assistance strategies from the teacher quality project, but we didn't have the chance to hear about that. Some questions were raised about publishers and their subcontracts. Some publishers don't own the rights to their materials. They might have to renegotiate their subcontracts, which can take a while.
Allan Adler: It's not just about not having the rights to a text, but not having the actual files themselves.
Jessica Brodey: It's going to take time to work these questions out.
Dave Schleppenbach: Does the publisher have the opportunity to renegotiate the price after the cost of the NIMAS workflow?
Rick Ferrie: They usually will not have the opportunity to do this. Also, we've had subcontracters who were reluctant to sign contracts without knowing what their rights are.
Charlene Gaynor: It seems like everyone in this room wants as many materials as possible to be included, to benefit students. Less than 10% of the publishers I represent have this on their radar screen. For many of them there is no way they can comply in this timeframe. If we really want a wide range of materials available, we have to take into account the needs of these publishers.
Rick Ferrie: The publishers don't actually get to determine what is core, that's the buyers' decision.
Dave Schleppenbach: It might be a good idea to think about the mechanism for training and education for the Dallas meeting.
[Action Items from Policy & Commerce Subgroup discussion:]
David Rose: We tried to avoid technical and policy issues and it was nearly impossible. Our group assumed that we had separated the NIMAS process and the payment process (the market model). We did want to tie our work to NCLB and IDEA's relationship to it. It's necessary to have accessible materials but that is not sufficient, instruction has to be accessible, not just information. What do we meet by core instructional materials? Textbooks we all agree on. We moved away from definitions based on standards and looked at other way to think about it: printed materials that the school purchases or adopts for all general education students for instruction. Education is not equitable if some students have the tools and some don't. What do students need to have that everyone else has? We do include things like workbooks, where the issue in instruction is not information but mastery. Curriculum-based measurements—assessments—would also be included. We did not feel that the NIMAS in its present state was meant to address state-level accountability tests, because these tests don't address instruction and are a measurement system with another purpose. If we're not the group to address these measures, who will address them? We already know that if there is incongruence between instruction and assessment, that's a problem. We are also not taking as our focus specialized materials that are specifically addressed to a minority population, i.e. students with disabilities, because we see our goal as dealing with general education materials. The thrust is for print materials, but the reality is that instructional materials are no longer exclusively print. A query to this body is that if this body is not going to cover the full range of instructional materials, then who is? We didn't really confront the issue of different populations. We've really limited ourselves to presentational items. As soon as we move to more interactive instructional materials, some disability groups become highlighted. How do we work with DAISY so that we can advance while DAISY advances? (i.e. to provide concept maps, alternate presentations) Can we push to say that that should be an included part? (And what is the equivalent of a concept map for students who are blind?) We want to get the NIMAS through and working, but the exciting stuff is ahead—beyond the representational barriers.
Dave Schleppenbach: From a technical standpoint, I wouldn't know where to begin to work on the content model you're talking about. Some of these are not consistent with the content model used by the NIMAS—XML. Is this something that would even fit within the NIMAS specification or will we need to do something entirely new?
Mike Wehmeyer: As a group we're not anywhere near this. An outcome we clearly want is universally designed materials, but the question is how to get there. David's notion that there could be additional tags, may or may not be the way to get to that.
Dave Schleppenbach: Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. We should seek closure for the current model first.
Bonnie Jones: David, you might want to mention the work scope of the NIMAS Development Center.
David Rose: Right, the Development Center is specifically charged with thinking about how to expand the NIMAS in the future. I think everyone agrees that we don't want to jeopardize NIMAS 1.0, but we need to think ahead too.
Dave Schleppenbach: Bonnie, what happens when the current grant runs out?
Bonnie Jones: The DOE would like NIMAS 1.0 to be in place for a while so the system can develop, but we're going to continue to think ahead.
Dave Schleppenbach: It might be worth pursuing a small maintenance grant to keep this work alive.
Jessica Brodey: There was broader language about instructional materials pitched during the IDEA 2004 legislative process. That language, which included websites, etc., was not adopted, and it was assumed that some of this other material would be taken up by different bodies, like the W3C. These are important issues, but they don't all belong in the NIMAS discussion.
Michael Wehmeyer: We need not threaten what has been happening with NFF—we need to partition that off.
Ron Stewart: There is a parallel effort going on at the postsecondary level, based on civil rights requirements. We need collaborative efforts that build on each other, not a wall between IDEA and the Rehabilitation Act.
Mary Platner: We may have a charge at this point but also be self-limiting. I thought the NIMAS was supposed to expand. In Arizona the publishers came in with an amendment for web accessibility according to Section 508, which we happily accepted. So the publishers have actually gone there and I don't know why the NIMAS can't go there either.
Ruth Ziolkowski: We might be able to be more proactive from the pedagogy approach. We should look at what the research is pointing us to.
Allan Adler: This group is important as the repository of knowledge, charged to inform so many different actors about what they're going to be legislated to do. We need to keep our eye on the calendar as the deadlines get closer. The time frame is continuing to narrow and we still have a lot of technical assistance work to do. That's what we should focus on.
Chuck Hitchcock: On the technical assistance and dissemination side, there are a few key activities we perform. One is to provide technical assistance and/or provide information to stakeholders—publishers (and their subcontractors), SEAs, LEAs, national authorized entities, IRCs, parent associations, Braille producers, disability advocacy organizations, postsecondary educational institutions, students with disabilities, educators, assistive technology developers, governors (NGA, NASDSE, CCSSO). If we had to focus most of our available attention on two to three of these listed groups, which ones should they be? [General consensus: LEAs/SEAs, publishers and their subcontractors.] Secondly, what exactly needs to be communicated?
Dave Schleppenbach: Not to speak for ATIA, but they might be willing to take on some of the education responsibility for this.
Rick Ferrie: Those who are opting in need to be educated about their decision.
Allan Adler: Somewhere you need to put timeline triggering events.
Janice Carter (visitor, The Benetech Initiative/Bookshare.org): Is there some analogy for something that will explain to states that they need to bear with us through the bumpy period to get to the benefits.
George Kerscher: Digital rights management (DRM) is a storm cloud. The authorized entities distributing files to the end user need to be aware of the appropriate DRM.
Jim Fruchterman: Most teachers and students are boggled by all of this. We need to explain this practically. Unauthorized sharing of content is bad for everyone.
Jessica Brodey: We need to communicate about how to write contracts—what should education agencies be negotiating for—quality control, timely delivery. Deadlines are important; files need to be turned over to the NIMAC ahead of time, not on the date of delivery.
Mary Ann Siller: Self-evaluation of textbooks delivery.
Jose Blackorby: We should include some language about the benefits of doing this.
Chuck Hitchcock: Is the FAQ too long?
Jose Blackorby: It could be customized for each type of user.
Jessica Brodey: ATIA created one specifically for our vendors.
Ron Stewart: We authored a legislative advisory letter for AHEAD.
Bonnie Jones: It would be helpful if these could be sent to the NIMAS Centers for review and to be kept updated.
Chuck Hitchcock: There are also IDEA one-pagers that have been vetted by the DOE, one of which is about NIMAS.
Dave Schleppenbach: We still need to list training for authorized entities.
Rick Bowes: There may need to be a help desk for the IRCs to provide support.
Chuck Hitchcock: We need to enrich the original exemplars—add TOCs, for example.
Jessica Brodey: That's the biggest request that we've received from vendors. As soon as we can, our vendors want one full-size textbook exemplar to see if it crashes their software.
George Kerscher: I could do that.
Dave Schleppenbach: We've found that large documents cause a lot of technical problems.
Jim Fruchterman: We have 800 XML books from OReilly Associates, technical books, that are large and crash quite often. They're not quite NIMAS, but are really close.
Chuck Hitchcock: Bill, when we communicate to state directors, in what form should our first contact be? One page to get your attention or a comprehensive document?
Bill East: There could be a very short note about what the directors actually need to know. And then what does the director need to communicate to others? It needs to be customized. One key thing to do quickly is determine who the key point persons are in each state. It will vary from state to state.
Chuck Hitchcock: Jen, does the state survey have the key person on it?
Jen Jude: No it doesn't. It has a person, but not necessarily this key person. We might want to ask the state director to appoint a point person.
Bill East: The feedback from the survey that I did might be a good place to start.
Chuck Hitchcock: If we produce something (a letter) could we run it by you?
Bill East: Sure, but you might want to run it by the people who actually need it.
David Rose: I think we still really need to sell this to them and explain why it's good. They don't have questions yet because they're not sold.
Chuck Hitchcock: We had been waiting for the regulations to come out, but we can't wait any longer. Deborah, what about making a link with the AT programs?
Deborah Buck: The AT programs want to help. I'm not really sure what to tell my members. Marketing this is key and then we need structured levels of approaches. ATAP exists in every state and territory (56 programs total). These programs are required to support everyone in all stages of life. The challenge for the AT programs is that they don't have a lot of money.
Rich Robison: I think this info should go to the PTI network too (109 across the country and territories).
Chuck Hitchcock: Texas is an important turning point for the adoption states. I'm optimistic that they're going to opt in.
Susan Christensen: I'm concerned about the braille producers ending up with one large file. A lot of braille producers are not using up-to-date equipment. I'm concerned about a single file for one large book.
Chuck Hitchcock: There are two approaches to that. One could be a recommendation for a file size limit. Or we could provide information to the person receiving the file that will allow them to break it up on their own. Observer Amy Montgomery has an example of tactile graphics for you all to see.
Bonnie Jones: Tactics for technical assistance and dissemination: leveraging resources and using high impact, low cost strategies for getting information out, e.g. the reception last night that was funded by ATIA. One strategy that's important is the teleconference and community of practice. That, combined with a list-serv of constituents, has a high impact.
Skip Stahl: The preliminary regulations in June said that the states still have an obligation to provide accessible instructional materials in a timely matter, whether or not through the NIMAS. We need to begin to decouple the concepts/goals of NIMAS from the method of implementation.
ACTION ITEM 1: Communicate with LEAs and SEAs about the interim solution for math and science markup before the NIMAC is operational (Dec. 2006).
ACTION ITEM 2: Provide support for publishers and/or conversion houses on the correct method for marking up math and science language under the interim solution.
ACTION ITEM 3: Distribute Susan Christensen’s document about table mark-up to publishers and conversion houses.
ACTION ITEM 4: Offer exemplars that cover a variety of content types.
ACTION ITEM 5: Create a list-serv to serve as a feedback mechanism for exemplar users.
ACTION ITEM 6: Start a discussion on the list-serv regarding tracking feedback. The goal is to find a logical mechanism for linking feedback mechanisms together to avoid duplication of effort.
ACTION ITEM 7: Put together a style guide or best practices document to advise publishers on using optional elements.
ACTION ITEM 8: Provide intermediate versions of the exemplars that are on the NIMAS website to show recommended NIMAS markup (i.e. table of contents, glossary, index, page number demarcation). Consider creating a class attribute for tables of contents.
ACTION ITEM 9: Note and convey the recommendations of the Technology Subgroup: (1) Image files (SVG, PNG, JPEG; 300 dpi) in a folder with corresponding placeholders in the XML are preferred to PDF as the image format. A PDF of a page of the work that includes metadata should also be provided to fulfill the statutory requirement. (2) Use the interim strategy for math—treat formulas and other math language as an image until the MathML modular extension is ready.
ACTION ITEM 10: Start a list-serv discussion on modifying the package file to reflect the existence of the metadata PDF and on other unresolved package file issues.
ACTION ITEM 11: Create a summary document for the NIMAS Committee on package files issues.
ACTION ITEM 12: Consider a way (letter?) to assist educational agencies in creating purchase order and contract language that appropriately references the requirements of the NIMAS.
ACTION ITEM 13: Prioritize methods of technical assistance as a topic of discussion at the next Development Committee meeting.
ACTION ITEM 14: Create a summary document on NIMAS implementation for distribution to the Policy & Commerce Subgroup for feedback.
ACTION ITEM 15: Write a one-pager explaining the benefits of opting in to the NIMAC. This document should clarify when the NIMAC will be operational.
ACTION ITEM 16: Plan a teleconference with publishers to explain how to comply with the NIMAS and clarify the triggering date.
ACTION ITEM 17: Consider methods of communicating with stakeholders about the NIMAS. Need to include a timeline of triggering dates and an explanation of the benefits of the NIMAS. This could be customized for each type of stakeholder.
ACTION ITEM 18: Create an exemplar of a full-size textbook (George Kerscher).
ACTION ITEM 19: Create specialized messages for the state directors of special education (through NASDSE) and for parents (through the Parent Training and Involvement (PTI) Network).
ACTION ITEM 20: Further discuss how to break up large files into more manageable sizes.
The NIMAS Development and Technical Assistance Center, supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), works with states, TA systems, disability advocates, national associations, technology experts, publishers and content conversion houses to improve the timely delivery of high quality accessible educational materials to students with disabilities.The NIMAS Center was launched on October 1, 2004.The project officer for both the Development and TA Centers is Bonnie Jones, Ed.D. Opinions expressed herein do not necessarily represent the Department of Education's position or policy.
40 Harvard Mills Square, Suite 3
Wakefield MA 01880-3233
Voice 781-245-2212
TTY 781 245 9320
Fax 781 245 5212