W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2011

RE: Success criteria 1.4.4

From: Jim Tobias <tobias@inclusive.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:08:19 -0400
To: "'Roger Hudson'" <rhudson@usability.com.au>, "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "'Felix Miata'" <mrmazda@earthlink.net>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01d001cc5e57$ec13ad60$c43b0820$@inclusive.com>
Roger, this is great stuff - your study deserves wider distribution; I hope
more studies will come along to elaborate the important points you make
about user behavior when confronted by barriers. It also illuminates the
argument over text resizing widgets; the con side, as I understand it, being
that users should be encouraged to use their browser controls instead. Maybe
so, but how to encourage them? Widgets have the advantage of being
discoverable right there on the screen.
 
You seem to be saying that the real problem with underadoption of
accessibility solutions is not the solutions themselves, but either the
understandable reluctance of many users to recognize and address the barrier
they're encountering (not meaning to be condescending here), or the
difficulty they have in finding and implementing the available solution. I
think that's absolutely right, and your suggestions about both increased
attention to community awareness and interface personalization tools sound
great to me.
 
On the latter, you're probably aware of the Global Public Inclusive
Infrastructure (GPII - http://gpii.net). The advantage of GPII's approach -
using a cloud-based profile to personalize every interface the user
encounters - is that it facilitates this personalization automatically,
having once collected the optimal interface needs and preferences from the
user via a wizard. 
 
***
Jim Tobias
Inclusive Technologies
+1.908.907.2387 v/sms
skype jimtobias
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Roger Hudson
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 7:46 PM
To: 'Gregg Vanderheiden'; 'Felix Miata'
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: RE: Success criteria 1.4.4
 
The question of text resize I think is very interesting. Late last year, I
interviewed 31 web users over the age of 60. Nearly half of these people
said they found the size of text on web pages a problem at least some of the
time.
 
When asked if they knew how to change the size of text on the page, 12
participants (39%) indicated they could use either browser zoom tools or
text resize. In other words, well over half had no idea what to do and some
can up with most imaginative strategies, the most common being to copy the
content into a word document and then increase the size with that. Also
worth noting, most participants said they had never seen on-page text resize
tools before and only 2 mentioned they had ever used them.
 
Most information about this study is available in the slides and transcript
of a presentation I gave at CSUN
http://www.dingoaccess.com/accessibility/improving-web-accessibility-for-the
-elderly-csun-slides-and-transcript/   
 
Regards
 
Roger Hudson
 
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Gregg Vanderheiden
Sent: Friday, 19 August 2011 12:31 AM
To: Felix Miata
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: Success criteria 1.4.4
 
Hi 
 
WCAG doesn't require zoom.  It only requires what is stated in the Success
Criterion.  Please do not mistake any technique as a requirement.
Techniques are always just "one way of doing it".  Sufficient techniques
are just one way that the WG has judged would meet the SC.    
 
The only thing ever required is exactly what is stated in the SC.
 
In this case
 
1.4.4 Resize text: Except for
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#captionsdef> captions and
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#images-of-textdef> images of text,
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#textdef> text can be resized without
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#atdef> assistive technology up to 200
percent without loss of content or functionality. (Level AA)
 
Relying on zoom would indeed allow you to meet this provision -- but it is
not the best practice.   The ability to enlarge text and have it reflow is
much more desirable. 
 
Zoom cannot be used to meet 1.4.8 though (except if all text blocks on the
page are less than 1/2 the page width).  For any text that is more than 1/2
page width - it would require the ability to enlarge text that reflows.
 
1.4.8 Visual Presentation: For the visual presentation of
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#blockstextdef> blocks of text, a
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#mechanismdef> mechanism is available to
achieve the following: (Level AAA)
1.	Foreground and background colors can be selected by the user.
2.	Width is no more than 80 characters or glyphs (40 if CJK).
3.	Text is not justified (aligned to both the left and the right
margins).
4.	Line spacing (leading) is at least space-and-a-half within
paragraphs, and paragraph spacing is at least 1.5 times larger than the line
spacing.
5.	Text can be resized without assistive technology up to 200 percent
in a way that does not require the user to scroll horizontally to read a
line of text  <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#fullscreenwindowdef> on a
full-screen window.
 
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#qr-visual-audio-contrast-visual-pres
entation> How to Meet 1.4.8 |
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-visual-
presentation.html> Understanding 1.4.8
 
 
Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project
http://Raisingthefloor.org   ---   http://GPII.net
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
On Aug 18, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
 
On 2011/08/18 15:35 (GMT+0200) Harry Loots composed:


Some users need to zoom, because the *default* size is not suffciently large
enough for them to comfortably read the words

For the vast majority of users this is true only until they suitably
personalize their own browser's default size, which is something expected as
part of the process of personalizing personal computing devices.

Zoom needs to work, but its need shouldn't be induced by the design itself,
such as by setting a sub-100% text size on the body or setting 62.5% on body
and bringing the size back up to less than the browser's default on P or
other prime content text.

WCAG should frown upon deviating a page's base size from browser defaults,
promoting sizing that is limited to conventional contextual uses.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
 
Received on Friday, 19 August 2011 10:08:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 19 August 2011 10:08:53 GMT