- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 09:04:26 +0000
- To: "tink@tink.uk" <tink@tink.uk>
- CC: "public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org>, "GLWAI Guidelines WG org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Léonie wrote: > Where did the 1100% target come from? Sorry if I've missed it, but I'm > assuming there is some research/evidence behind this choice There were some links to research posted on the github page [1]. However, they were fairly long and academic and from reading the abstracts I couldn’t see a connection to the 1100% figure. I would appreciate it if AllanJ-uaag (sorry I don’t know your name!) could post a paragraph or two drawing the conclusion that gets us to the figure. (I did have a look through the LVTF requirements doc, but didn’t see any support there, it’s a bit out of the blue.) Léonie also wrote: > I suggest we also need to have conversations with browser vendors to see > if they're willing to implement the functionality. The desktop browsers would need to allow for greater zoom, but I think the more urgent problem is with mobile user agents where there is currently no mechanism for zoom without horizontal scrolling. Some mobile UAs do include text-sizing, but providing a setting for pinch-zooming past 100% with re-flow would be far more effective. I made an outline proposal previously [2]. Cheers, -Alastair 1] https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-SC/issues/5 2] Under point 3 in: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2016JulSep/0065.html
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2016 09:05:05 UTC