Re: Addition to Reflow Understanding

Hi Wayne and all,

I added the suggested edit to the Understanding Reflow Issue [1].

Kindest Regards,
Laura

[1] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/781#issuecomment-385659671

On 4/30/18, Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com> wrote:
> Laura, I like that too. +1. WCAG 2.0 go the idea that enlargement was
> necessary to ensure perception, but it missed the major disruption caused
> by horizontal scrolling. Laur's paragraph makes that clear without having
> to say the earlier versions were wrong.
>
> Wayne
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 1:41 PM Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Laura, I like it. Let's see what Wayne thinks...
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:07 PM Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Wayne,
>>>
>>> Like Alastair, I don't understand the comparison to Braille.
>>>
>>> However, I do understand that for people with low vision, enlarged
>>> text with reflow is critical. Maybe that point isn't coming across in
>>> the Understanding doc [1].
>>>
>>> I wonder if it would help to add a bit to first paragraph (after the
>>> first sentence) such as:
>>>
>>> "For people with low vision, enlarged text with reflow enables
>>> reading. It is critical. Enlargement enables perception of characters.
>>> Reflow enables tracking. Tracking is following along lines of text,
>>> including getting from the end of one line to the beginning of the
>>> next line."
>>>
>>> The draft Reflow persona quote [2] for the understanding doc is:
>>>
>>> "It's nearly impossible to read text if I have to scroll to read each
>>> line. It's disorienting, and hard to understand what I'm reading. I
>>> lose my place scrolling back and forth. Incredibly frustrating! I
>>> usually just give up and quit reading "
>>>
>>> Thoughts? Ideas for improvement?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Kindest Regards,
>>> Laura
>>>
>>> [1] https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/reflow/understanding/21/reflow.html
>>> [2]
>>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Persona_Quotes_for_2.1_Understanding_Documents#Quotes
>>>
>>> On 4/27/18, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
>>> > Hi Wayne,
>>> >
>>> > I’m guessing you are referencing this thread on github:
>>> > https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/883#issuecomment-385044021
>>> >
>>> > Others can read the thread for wider context (I replied there); for
>>> > the
>>> > paragraph suggested I’m not sure what you want to achieve with the
>>> braille
>>> > comparison?
>>> >
>>> > Perhaps I’m missing something, but braille is enabled via
>>> > screenreaders
>>> (at
>>> > least for web content), so it isn’t a separate thing. Are you trying
>>> > to
>>> draw
>>> > a parallel between screenreaders/braille and magnifiers/reflow? If so,
>>> > I
>>> > don’t get it.
>>> >
>>> > As I keep saying: I am not objecting to the need, but there needs to
>>> > be
>>> a
>>> > feasible solution.
>>> >
>>> > E.g. where Jonathan wrote: “sometimes there are powers that object to
>>> > criteria that are well documented.”
>>> >
>>> > The criteria can be documented up the wazoo (sorry, it’s Friday night
>>> and
>>> > I’m writing this quite late), but if there isn’t a reasonable &
>>> > feasible
>>> > solution it doesn’t help with progress in WCAG.
>>> >
>>> > We could add something that makes the requirement beyond the SC clear,
>>> but
>>> > the reference to braille makes it less clear for me, and I’m not sure
>>> what
>>> > it is trying to say.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> >
>>> > -Alastair
>>> >
>>> > Previously suggested paragraph:
>>> >> "For people with low vision, enlarged text with reflow, serves the
>>> >> same
>>> >> function that braille serves for non-visual readers. While both
>>> >> groups
>>> >> benefit from audio reading formats, they both need a self-paced
>>> >> reading
>>> >> medium for understanding difficult content. Enlargement enables
>>> perception
>>> >> of characters. Reflow makes reading a tractable operation."
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laura L. Carlson
>>>
>>>
>


-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2018 12:31:44 UTC