Forum on Library Services for People with Disabilities
Minutes of the Meeting held March 8, 2002
Present:
Jan Murray (facilitator)
Lindy Babington Australian School
Libraries Association
Dianne Calvert National Library
Wanda
Dillon State Library of Tasmania
Bruce Maguire Human Rights and Equal
Opportunity Commission
Rose Blustein Vision Australia
Susanne Bruhn
Australian Library and Information Association
Jane Evans National
Information and Library Service
Bill Jolley DAISY Corporation
Dr Lynne
Davis Blind Citizens Australia
Janet Poole Logan City Council Libraries
Janet Worden State Library of Queensland
Yvonne Morant Library and
Information Service of Western Australia
Brian Rope Australian Deafness
Forum
Mary Schnackenberg Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind
Murray Spriggs State Library of New South Wales
Larry Stillman State
Library of Victoria
Pam Wansynk National Information and Library Service
Natalie Sandon (Mundy) Australian Association for the Deaf
Dr Kirsty
Williamson Monash University
Arto Rissanen ACT Library and Information
Service
John L. Gard Hear a Book Service
Heather McLaren Department of
Education, Science and Training
Melissa Willan Copyright Agency Ltd
Geoff Payne Vision Australia
Nel Fredericks State Library of South
Australia
Helen McKenzie Department of Family and Community Services
Jasmine Cameron National Library
Jan Fullerton National Library
Sandra Henderson National Library
Robert Altamore Blind Citizens
Australia
Jo Cruickshank National Office for the Information Economy
Di
Francis Roundtable on Information Access for People with Print Disabilities
Bet Dracoulis National Library (Information Services)
Cheryl Brickell
National Library (Kinetica)
Sue McKnight Deakin University (representing
the Council of Australian University Librarians)
Rosemary Worley Wollongong
City Library
Ms Fullerton opened the Forum by welcoming the participants and explaining why the Library had convened the Forum. During 2001 the National Library reviewed the outcomes of the Towards Federation 2001 meeting held in Canberra in March 1992, and the follow-up review meeting held in Canberra in December 1993, and noted the lack of progress on issues related to library services to users with disabilities. The Forum was convened with the aim of facilitating the development of a national action plan.
There was an initial query to Mr Maguire about the planned Forum on tertiary education material for Blind and vision impaired students. He responded that the likely date is now late April, but this will be finalised shortly. (Information about the Forum is at http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/education/forum1.htm)
1. Library collections
In introducing this agenda item, Dr Murray asked that participants address two major themes the production of alternative format material, and the sharing of information.
Production
The papers by Mr Payne and Mr Jolley are relevant to this item, and Dr Murray reminded participants that the issue covers audio, captioned and large print material and resources for those with intellectual disabilities, as well as Braille.
There was some discussion about the distinction between educational and recreational materials, and their differing requirements. For the user the distinctions are not always apparent, and some recreational materials require a structured presentation.
Some producers are faced with a significant cost issue in moving from analogue to digital recording. Library services such as NILS and Vision Australia, which produce material for Blind and visually impaired clients, face large costs in replacing collection materials and equipment.
Mr Gard from Hear-a-Book, which produces 2-track audio books, said his company has not seen a demand for digital resources, but he is concerned that cutbacks in regional and rural libraries means they are not buying resources for their patrons with disabilities. Hear-a-Book aims to produce audio books in a timeframe which allows the audio book versions of popular titles to be available from public libraries at the same time as they are available in bookstores. The patrons are usually those who have lost their sight later in life, are housebound, or are in remote areas.
The challenge is to identify ways to move forward to assist producers and libraries who want to include these resources in their collections. A disturbing trend is the number of non-metropolitan public libraries that are no longer acquiring alternative format materials.
The DAISY standard will allow a variety of formats to be produced. A greater understanding of DAISY among user groups and other interested parties will facilitate a move to a standardised format.
There is a general view that analogue formats are only supportable for another three to five years. It is already more difficult to acquire the analogue equipment, and to service the machines or replace parts. The changeover to digital production must be planned in the near future, and funding and government agencies need to be made more aware of the cost implications.
In the United States the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped (http://www.loc.gov/nls/) believes digital talking books will replace analogue completely by 2008, and the DAISY standard has recently been approved as a national standard (ANSI/NISO Z39.86-2002). [see http://www.loc.gov/nls/newsreleases/03152002.html for information about this standard and a link to the standard itself]. There is a need to ensure it is also recognised as an Australian standard, and to record masters in that format irrespective of the format of delivery to customers.
The DAISY standard is very flexible, and allows for variable levels of markup depending on the content and likely use of the material. Scholarly materials would generally need heavy structuring, recreational material less structure. For e-books the only standard specification is open e-book (see http://www.openebook.org/specs.org) , but this is only for text. It is expected that the DAISY navigational model will be used when the open e-book specification is extended to audio.
Developments in the US in terms of educational materials are important, but at present there are a variety of state-based bills with differing requirements. National legislation is being called for. In Australia it is important to find ways to maximise resources and minimise efforts required to produce resources in a variety of alternative formats. In the past much of this work has relied on charities and volunteers, but this is no longer sustainable. The involvement of government, particularly for the production of tertiary texts, is necessary. For production using DAISY the overheads are higher for textbooks because of the complex markup involved.
With a relatively small market for audio books, there is always going to be a requirement to import much of the stock for libraries. In response to a query from Mr Spriggs, Mr Jolley indicated that some commercial producers overseas are now looking at using DAISY. It is important to ensure that files produced using DAISY are in a format that can be accessed on mainstream equipment. DAISY also makes it possible to display text on a screen, and it is also theoretically possible to use a split screen display to show text and AUSLAN.
Mr Payne raised the issue of recent US proposals for encryption of DAISY books, which would have the effect of prohibiting use by non-US citizens. This would hinder international interlibrary loan, unless mechanisms were introduced to allow the books to be read when on loan in other jurisdictions.
Ms Sandon brought up the issue of a lack of scholarly captioned material. While popular material is often available with captions, documentaries and other educational resources are not. There was a question about the availability and promotion of the National Librarys captioned video material, which should be available nationally.
Ms Davis spoke about the difficulties of catalogue access for people with disabilities. The catalogue as a whole must be accessible, and records for materials in alternative formats must be in the catalogue, and appropriately identified in the catalogue (including captioned videos). In addition, alternative format material must be available for interlibrary loan.
It was suggested that the staff of many public libraries do not have a good understanding of accessibility guidelines. Such an understanding has to include web accessibility as well as building accessibility.
Ms Brickell provided some information about contributions to Kinetica. Of 50 organisations which had contributed to NUC:D in the past, 36 were current Kinetica contributors, and a further six organisations add their holdings with the assistance of Kinetica staff. She assured participants that Kinetica meets accessibility guidelines. A new web form to assist smaller organisations to contribute data is now available, and the Batch*Link fee is being abolished from July 1, 2002. Kinetica is encouraging smaller libraries to form consortia to achieve further cost efficiencies in their membership.
Dr Williamson provided the Forum with brief information about some work the Information and Telecommunications Needs Research group has been undertaking. To date there have been very few websites suitable for people with low literacy levels or an intellectual disability. Websites developed in two projects they have recently completed for the Deaf and for people with physical and intellectual disabilities can be viewed online at http://www.elr.com.au/lol
There was some discussion of the issue of equipment for audio books. At present many machines are not useable by people with disabilities because of design faults such as small buttons, or menus which cannot be read. Manufacturers need to be made aware of the needs of users with disabilities.
Recommendations from this first session:
That the National Information and Library Service (NILS) refer the Digital Accessible Information System (DAISY) standard for the production of digital talking books to the appropriate standards body for possible adoption as an Australian standard. The National Library of Australia will identify the appropriate body and report back to NILS. Target date: Dec 2002
That the National Information and Library Service (NILS) act as a central point for advice and information about the Digital Accessible Information System (DAISY) standard. Target date: ongoing
That the National Library of Australia continue to promote the addition of records for materials in alternative formats to the National Bibliographic Database, and encourage the appropriate identification of such materials in library catalogues throughout Australia. Target date: Jun 2002
That the National Library of Australia, the Council of Australian University Librarians and the Council of Australian State Libraries publicise the need for library catalogues on the web to be accessible to people with disabilities to at Least Level A (existing catalogues) or Level AA (new catalogues), as specified by the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. Target date: Jun 2002
That the National Library of Australia and the National Braille Authority refer the Unified English Braille Code to the appropriate standards body for possible adoption as an Australian standard (in order to facilitate the exchange of Braille information resources). Target date: Sept 2002
Agreed action:
That the National Library of Australia and the Australian Association of the Deaf will promote the availability of the captioned videos in the National Librarys collection. Target date: Jun 2002
2. Copyright
It has been clarified with the Copyright Agency (CAL) that master copies made in tertiary institutions, to provide services to users with disabilities, do not have to be destroyed. They could therefore be shared between institutions. While records for some of this material could be included in Kinetica, some of the material in question does not normally have a Kinetica record (such as book chapters). It should be possible to make a database of records available, indicating what masters have been created and by which organisation. Mr Payne said it would also be useful if the masters themselves could be collected into a single repository. There was some discussion of the fact that such copying under licence is restricted to tertiary institutions, and public libraries are excluded. Whereas tertiary institutions can report to CAL based on sampling, public libraries must report every occurrence of such copying. It was suggested that CAL could investigate this.
Ms Evans spoke about the problems of libraries such as NILS, with large collections of analogue materials. Conversion of these to digital format is not permitted unless commercial copies are unavailable. The costs of checking availability and subsequent purchase of multiple copies means many items now available in analogue format will not be able to be replaced.
Ms Willan from the Copyright Agency indicated that CAL was prepared to convene a working group to discuss copyright issues. Those interested in being involved should contact her.
Music copying is also a problem for university libraries, since it is not covered by the educational licence, and not many of the publishers are covered by CAL. Ms Willan will contact the appropriate organisation.
Recommendations:
That the National Library of Australia and the Copyright Agency Limited investigate the setting up of a national database of information about master copies of resources converted to digital format for the production of alternative formats. Target date: Dec 2002
That the Copyright Agency Limited work with disability organisations and members of the Australian Publishers Association to develop a code of practice for fair dealing on materials for library users with disabilities, and convene a working party to discuss the simplification of copyright compliance for services to these users. The working party should include representatives of the Australian Libraries Copyright Committee, the Australian Library and Information Association and the National Library of Australia. Target date: Sept 2002
3. Legal deposit
Ms Fullerton explained that the National Library is at present discussing with the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts the extension of the legal deposit section of the Copyright Act to include non-print materials. It is also talking to the Australian Publishers Association about how access to this material would be managed.
A major issue with the acquisition of electronic materials is ongoing maintenance, and the costs involved. The National Library is working on a costing model, which should be available in several weeks. The estimated cost of the proposed selective electronic legal deposit is $10 million over the next 10 years. No additional funding is provided to the Library by government to cater for the increased costs of dealing with digital materials.
Ms Fullerton said that the Library was in favour, in principle, of Mr Paynes suggestion for the deposit of XML files (although not as a replacement for print deposit). Mr Payne indicated that Vision Australia would be interested in working with the Library on a proof-of-concept project for this.
Recommendations:
That the National Library of Australia work with Vision Australia to scope a pilot project to test the feasibility of receiving publications in Extensible Markup Language (XML) format. Target date: Sept 2002
4. Library users with disabilities in remote and indigenous communities.
There is a general lack of culturally appropriate materials for indigenous library users, not just those with disabilities. Services directed to people with disabilities in indigenous communities need to utilise people who are already familiar with and accustomed to dealing with these communities, such as health workers.
Ms Morant said the cultural issues are perhaps more important than the disability issues in indigenous communities. Employing indigenous workers in libraries is a key factor in increasing the accessibility of libraries. In Western Australia this has been recognised with a 10-year strategy to increase the employment of indigenous people in the cultural sector.
It was suggested that perhaps the best way to increase awareness of the issues would be to recommend that a paper on the topic be presented to the next ATSILIRN conference [for information about ATSILIRN see http://home.vicnet.net.au/~atsilirn/ ]. It would also be useful to make contact with the National Indigenous Disability Network.
The Australian Library and Information Association is interested in the issues faced by remote library users.
Recommendations:
That the issue of services to indigenous library users with disabilities be referred to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Library and Information Resource Network (ATSILIRN) by the National Library of Australia, with a request for a paper on this issue to be included in the program for their next conference. This issue will also be brought to the attention of the National Indigenous Disability Network. Target date: Jun 2002
5. Adaptive technologies and web accessibility.
The basic principle is that all library websites should comply with the W3C level A guidelines [ the W3C guidelines can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ . Conformance to level A is achieved if all Priority 1 checkpoints are satisfied. The checkpoints for priority 1, 2 and 3 conformance are listed in http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/full-checklist.html ). The Disability Discrimination Act makes it clear that organisations do not have a choice in this accessibility is a requirement. In addition to design issues, content needs attention for some user groups. Older people, for example, prefer less cluttered screens and larger fonts.
The audience is important while those with a visual impairment find images not so useful, they are often preferred by users with an intellectual disability or low literacy level. The needs of those from non-English speaking backgrounds are frequently ignored.
Some libraries have put much effort into accessible web sites but fail to ensure that their onsite facilities are equally accessible. Adaptive technologies onsite need to be integrated into the library facilities, and it is important that library staff are knowledgeable about these technologies.
In New South Wales there are numbers of public libraries where equipment acquired some years ago is now out-of-date and not integrated into the general library services.
Ms Poole explained that at the Logan City Council libraries, there had been a great deal of community consultation prior to the installation of adaptive technologies, and there is continued promotion of the resources. This is particularly successful if undertaken within community organisations. Sufficient staff time has to be devoted to promotional activities, and staff have to undergo regular training. It was seen as important for all staff to be trained, so there are always staff on hand who can operate equipment and assist users. Many disability organisations are happy to assist with training, and attention was drawn to the Disability Awareness Kit (http://www.openroad.net.au/access/dakit/).
Web-4-All (http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/rd/smartcard/) was mentioned as a useful development in terms of enabling software setup to be personalised. The ACT Library and Information Service is about to test this system.
In response to a query about the current usefulness of TTYs, Ms Sandon said that it remains a very important service. Not many Deaf people are confident in using the National Relay Service, so although the NRS might be more convenient for library staff, it is important for users that the TTY be retained.
Mr Stillman reminded participants that the HREOC site (http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/index.html) is an excellent source of information about web accessibility and related issues. Ms McKnight offered to make available the policy guidelines developed at Deakin University [these can be located by going to site http://dugs.deakin.edu.au/ and searching for the word accessibility].
Ms Bruhn referred to the newly revised ALIA Guidelines, and is seeking feedback on these.
Mr Maguire spoke about the role of HREOC, and administration of the Disability Discrimination Act. The Act is complaints-based, and HREOC assists organisation meet their obligations under the Act, and also helps consumers. Although HREOC maintains a register of Disability Action Plans (see http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/action_plans/index.html for information about DAP and the register of plans), they do not have the resources to monitor implementation of these plans. Libraries should contact HREOC if they require help in developing or implementing a Disability Action Plan, or in complying with the Disability Discrimination Act.
A number of organisations indicated that they are willing to assist in staff training.
Recommendations:
That the National Library of Australia provide links from the Australian Libraries Gateway (ALG) to web accessibility guidelines. Target date: June 2002
Agreed action:
The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission will provide assistance in the development of Disability Action Plans and implementation of the Disability Discrimination Act. Target date: ongoing
6. Physical access.
Participants were referred to the recent (January 2002) Disability Standard on Access to Buildings Directions Report (available in PDF or Word formats from http://www.abcb.gov.au/index.cfm?fuseaction=Publications (click on the Access link) ) and also available in alternative formats from the Australian Building Codes Board.
There is much information available about building accessibility, and participants were urged to think about the issue more broadly. It also encompasses such things as audio loop technology, visible fire alarms for library users with hearing impairments, adequate lighting, shelving placement and height, spine readability, appropriate lift controls and the availability of interpreters.
There was discussion of homebound library services, for those users unable or unwilling to visit the library, and a delivery service for those who have difficulty in transporting their library materials. A homebound service is appreciated by users with many types of disability, including those with mental illness.
7. Library staff training and awareness
Most peak disability bodies are prepared to offer assistance in training library staff. In terms of Deaf and hearing impaired awareness training, both the Australian Association of the Deaf and the Australian Deafness Forum are happy to become involved in such training. It was thought that it was important to involve people with disabilities in training of library staff, because that made the training much more effective.
There was discussion of the extent to which training in disability issues is included in library training. It seems that in both TAFE and university library courses there is at best limited focus on disability issues.
There are some concerns about user privacy if library records identify clients with disabilities. While there are general demographic statistics about the level of disability in a community, funding agencies often want detailed local figures in funding submissions.
Recommendations:
That the Australian Library and Information Association investigate the coverage of disability-related issues in current library and information management courses. Target date: July 2002
That a list of training providers who can deliver disability awareness training be developed and promulgated. The State Library of New South Wales to lead on this. Target date Sept 2002
Agreed action:
The Australian Association of the Deaf will assist in awareness training for library staff. Target date: ongoing.
Contact details are:
Australian Association of the Deaf
Suite 513, 149 Castlereagh
Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Voice: 02 9286 3944
TTY: 02 9286 3933
Fax: 02 9286 3955
