RE: Metadata On Hover SC Text

Not to continue to make this a pain, but what about:

​​​​​== SC Text ==

Informational content which appears on hover that is necessary for understanding must:

* maintain full visibility
* be available via any input method.

== Related Glossary additions or changes ==

Full visibility: content remains visible within the viewport and is not covered, obscured, clipped, or truncated as well as, stays visible in the viewport as long as the user needs it.

== Testability ==

For each item of content that is shown by hovering your mouse over an element, check that the content shown on hover:

1. maintains full visibility.
2. available via any input method.

Expected Results

* Check #1, #2 are true.



* katie *
 
Katie Haritos-Shea 
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)
 
Cell: 703-371-5545 | ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA | LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545 | @ryladog


-----Original Message-----
From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 9:25 AM
To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org
Subject: Re: Metadata On Hover SC Text

Hi Jon and all,

So maybe we are back to:

== SC Text ==

Informational content which appears on hover that is necessary for understanding must be:

* fully visible
* available via any input method.

== Related Glossary additions or changes ==

Fully visible: content within the viewport that is not covered, obscured, clipped, or truncated and remains in the viewport as long as the user needs it.

== Testability ==

For each item of content that is shown by hovering your mouse over an element, check that the content shown on hover:

1. is fully visible.
2. available via any input method.

Expected Results

* Check #1, #2 are true.

What do you think? Would that work? Ideas for improvement?

Thank you.

Kindest Regards,
Laura

On 11/18/16, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
>> I would be very happy with it but am not sure if others would be. 
>> What kinds of push back could we anticipate?
>
> I'd imagine people would ask about fly out menus, modal dialogs, roll overs,
> etc.    I'd assume if something appeared on focus and remain apparent on
> focus then it would pass this requirement?
>
> I'm concerned about the text "does not obscure other content" because 
> any hamburger menu or dialog will obscure other content.
>
> Jonathan
>
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
> 703.637.8957 (Office)
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:10 AM
> To: Alastair Campbell
> Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf
> Subject: 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
>
>


--
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Friday, 18 November 2016 14:33:51 UTC