Re: Metadata On Hover SC Text

Hi Alastair and all,

Thank you. I agree it is an issue for both use cases. The cleanest way
to address it would be to use your latest proposed language as there
would be no testing.

For everyone that SC language again is:

> Informational content which only appears on-hover *must not be* necessary
> for understanding and *must not obscure other content*.

I would be very happy with it but am not sure if others would be. What
kinds of push back could we anticipate?

Thoughts everyone?

Kindest Regards,
Laura

On Nov 17, 2016 4:57 PM, "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:

> Hi Laura,
>
>> The original issue was the cursor overlapping the tooltip
>> content making the tooltip text unreadable.
>
> Ah, I thought we had established previously that is a user-agent issue?
> Apologies, looking back it was a common issue, just not universal.
>
> So if we try to cover cursor overlapping, then logically if someone relies
> on tooltips then it will happen. There is no need to test, it will occur.
>
> Therefore, tooltips should not be relied on. At all.
>
> Also, the first part of the evidence included someone doing testing that
> showed the tooltip obscured an important link, and I think Wayne mentioned
> that as an issue as well?
>
> It is an issue both ways – the tooltip being obscured, and the tooltip
> obscuring other content.
>
> In which case we can simplify to:
>
> ------------
>
> Informational content which only appears on-hover *must not be* necessary
> for understanding and *must not obscure other content*.
>
> ------------
>
> I.e. it shouldn’t matter if it is visible, readable or not.
>
> That seems to cover the evidence/benefits on the wiki, is it too harsh?
>
> -Alastair

Received on Friday, 18 November 2016 13:10:42 UTC