- From: Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 11:56:44 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 18/07/2019 20:55, Rachael Bradley Montgomery wrote: > Pushback and discussion are good -- its how we get good SC. +1 > Just to clarify, this isn't saying that scrolling isn't allowed at all, > just that it shouldn't be needed to get to a control that allows main > navigation or that starts/progresses/ends a progress from the expected > place where that control is needed. The intent is that this apply to the > expected screen sizes that are being tested, without additional > magnification/zoom. Do you have any suggestions on how to clarify all that? Indeed we can't say scrolling isn't allowed. To some extent I see this SC is taking a complex design trade-off that designers already make and saying it is critical to avoid being a barrier to people with cognitive disabilities, not just an inconvenience. That design trade-off is that any at any viewport size, zoom or magnification level the important controls should be easy to locate. that means are ideally immediately obvious, or less desirably can be found without random exploration. However, scrolling or expansion will be required sometimes, that's life. This issue of cognitive accessibility requirements moving more SCs from more technical specifications towards a space where designers are making decisions as part of their "job" is something we'll have to deal with *very* carefully. I guess is probably a good 1st SC to explore this in. Steve > Regards, > > Rachael > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:46 PM Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk > <mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk>> wrote: > > On 18/07/2019 20:34, Rachael Bradley Montgomery wrote: > > Jon, > > > > I believe the intent of this SC was that scrolling of any kind, > > including auto-scrolling, would not be needed. That makes designing > > long forms with numerous optional fields more difficult to design > for > > but other techniques such as pagination, collapsible, and thoughtful > > placement of required fields within the process can be used to > address > > this SC. > > This will be extremely challenging, if not impossible, on > smaller/mobile > screens, particularly in landscape mode. > > I'd also caution that simply saying outright that scrolling is not > allowed will have many ramifications - how does this interact with > other > SCs and requirements, like being able to zoom to 200% at least (which > would then half the amount of available screen real estate)? And at > what > screen/browser window resolution? > > A priori, I can foresee a lot of pushback on this (not least from me, > I'm afraid) > > P > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > > www.splintered.co.uk <http://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 > > > > -- > Rachael Montgomery, PhD > Director, Accessible Community > rachael@accessiblecommunity.org <mailto:rachael@accessiblecommunity.org> > >
Received on Friday, 19 July 2019 10:56:50 UTC