Re: Add Font Family back to adaptation

Hi Wayne,

For what purpose? I thought the point was that we assume people can over-ride fonts, therefore we cover that need with sizing?

Having looked at the distribution of font-sizes, do we need to increase the spacing aspects of the current bullets?

Note that there is a balance: Layouts can take a certain amount of buffer before they look odd in regular use. If we push past that point (my feeling is around 10-15% increase) then it will be either rejected by the design & dev community, or moved into a personalisation SC.

Going past that point means a more significant override, so either discarding the author-styles (like Linearise assumes), or adding alternative layouts with personalisation. In either of those cases, it would move out of the text-adaptation SC anyway.

I’m more concerned with colour which isn’t covered yet, does anyone have further ideas on including that?

-Alastair



From: Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, 6 June 2017 at 16:50
To: LVTF - low-vision-a11y <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Subject: Add Font Family back to adaptation
Resent-From: LVTF - low-vision-a11y <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tuesday, 6 June 2017 at 16:51

It is time to put font family back into Adapting Text. Steve has addressed the icon substitution issue well. Namely add failure to mark icon fonts to 1.3.1. I have looked at the distribution of font face sizes. Within each writing system:

  1.  Identify a mean character size within the script for that system.
  2.  Compute the ratio R of average character size by family to mean character size over all families in a representative sample.
  3.  Using language experts, establish boundaries that make sense close to 1 standard deviation from the mean.

Note: Mean +/- 1.2 should do based on the physiology of the human eye.



Wayne