- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 08:55:39 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 26/04/2016 08:49, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > If you *are* meaning that WCAG 2.0 meant actual physical sizes all > along, then...I'm sorry, but we're back to the problem that it is > impossible for an author to actually guarantee at what physical size > anything is rendered on every user's screen. So the normative language > for WCAG 2.0 includes a requirement that cannot be absolutely tested, as > it depends on each individual user's physical screen size, resolution, > zoom factor, dpi, etc. To be absolutely clear: if it's suggested that WCAG 2.0 actually meant "pt" as measured on screen, you now have wording which can result in an auditor testing a page/app on one device (placing a ruler against the screen to measure how big text comes out) and giving content a PASS, while another auditor on a different device following the exact same procedure may come up with a FAIL (as their device/UA renders the same measurements set by the author in CSS etc differently). Which then makes the whole normative wording completely subjective (dependent on an auditor's exact device/screen size/UA/etc). At which point it's meaningless. P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2016 07:55:56 UTC