W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org > January 2018

Re: MATF Minutes 25 January 2018

From: Detlev Fischer (TK) <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 14:12:37 +0100
To: public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org
Message-ID: <5783c18f-8ff1-c496-baf8-d69b400ab547@testkreis.de>
My understanding was that the user agent control exception was mainly 
meant to cover elements that are not affected by CSS styling so cannot 
meet the target requirement without hacks, i.e., the inputs of type 
radio and type checkbox.

Am 25.01.2018 um 21:30 schrieb Abma, J.D. (Jake):
> I feel you Patrick... :-) and you're right, it's an example of one of many SC where I have the feeling we weren't fully done but times up as I understand... also the reason for the AA not making it. Wondering what we can still do about those open issues still present in current the version...
> Wasn't around for 2.0 but feels like the flow should be: normative text => understanding => techniques => re-work on normative text if needed => go to CR. This will proof the pudding and improve quality and certainty.
> ________________________________________
> From: Patrick H. Lauke <plauke@paciellogroup.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 6:45 PM
> To: public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org
> Subject: Re: MATF Minutes 25 January 2018
> On 25/01/2018 17:13, Kim Patch wrote:
> [...]
>> <Kathy>
>> <http://codepen.io/patrickhlauke/pen/aBNREe>http://codepen.io/patrickhlauke/pen/aBNREe
>> Kathy: this example might've been 48, but it's close
>> ... it doesn't go around the whole area, just the link itself
>> This example to fly because the low-vision task force didn't like it
> I seem to remember discussions about people not understanding that the
> green used there was for illustrative purposes only (to show to
> developers where the actual hit target was), and not "this is how a
> website would present it to its users". Do we have a reference to their
> not liking it?
> Also, as noted many times: the understanding will have the unenviable
> task of somehow addressing this particularly confusing (some may say
> nonsensical) part of the normative language:
> "User Agent Control
> The size of the target is determined by the user agent and is not
> modified by the author."
> It is still my contention that a strict reading of this means that it
> would practically never be applicable as an exception, as the size given
> by the user agent to a target depends on a huge number of factors
> (including things like the font size of the target, the size/dimensions
> of the element's parent/ancestor elements, etc). Again, strictly reading
> this, I could argue that as soon as an author does anything
> styling-wise, like even just changing the overall document's font size a
> tiny shade from its default, the author has in essence "modified the
> size of the target".
> body { font-size: 0.99em; } or even body ( font-size: 1.01em; } or
> whatever will influence all font sizes throughout the document,
> including the font size of links/buttons/etc - resulting in a change in
> the target size due to author modification.
> Limiting this in understanding to something like "CSS applied directly
> to the element in question, and only limited to changes in dimensions,
> padding, margin, font-size" may work to an extent, but then an author
> can simply avoid setting those on the actual element, and instead put a
> <span> wrapper or whatever around it...nominally being able to claim
> that they adhered to the above limiting clause...but in effect still
> modifying exactly what this seemed to intend not to allow modification of.
> I did comment about this exception on many occasions on list and on
> github, but sadly it was never even aknowledged. Now it'll fall to the
> understanding document to somehow square this circle, sadly.
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
> --
> Senior Accessibility Engineer
> The Paciello Group
> https://www.paciellogroup.com
> A VFO™ Company http://www.vfo-group.com/
> --
> This message is intended to be confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please delete this message from your system and
> notify us immediately. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action
> taken or omitted to be taken by an unintended recipient in reliance on
> this message is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use or disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the message immediately.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------

Detlev Fischer PhD

Telefon: +49-40-43 18 75-25
Mobile: +49-157 57 57 57 45
Fax: +49-40-43 18 75-45
E-Mail: detlev.fischer@testkreis.de

Anschrift: Werderstr. 34, 20166 Hamburg
Amtsgericht Hamburg HRB 58 167
Received on Friday, 26 January 2018 13:13:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 26 January 2018 13:13:07 UTC