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

Re: Success criteria 1.4.4

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:23:11 -0500
To: IG - WAI Interest Group List list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-id: <14561001-717E-4931-A09D-7B74D7820062@trace.wisc.edu>
First -- 
I only occasionally see posts to this list as it is one of 15 or 20 or so that I receive and keep a copy of in case people later ask me about something.  But please do not think me rude if I do not reply to emails posted to the list.   I probably did not see it.

Second -- To get things looked at by the Working Group...
  If you see things in the understanding documents or techniques that you think are ambiguous or in error - please post them to the public comments list - where they can be reviewed by the working group and fixed if appropriate. 


Now to this post - since I happened to see it: 

The use of absolute units is not necessarily result in a failure.   First - some browsers will scale even if absolute units are used.   So it would depend on the design of the page.    Also, if the page is in two columns (or more) one can Zoom 200% and still not require horizontal scroll to read successive lines of text so it would meet both 1.4.4 and option 5 of 1.4.8.    Most all  (all?) browsers now support zoom so it is pretty hard to fail 1.4.4 today. 

The PREFERRED way is to have fonts enlarge and re-flow in a logical fashion that preserves all semantics and ease of use -  so there is no need to horizontally scroll for any reason. 


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 Oct 30, 2011, at 6:23 PM, Jonathan Avila wrote:

> [Ramon wrote]
>   "Fxxx: Failure of Success Criterion 1.4.4 due to using absolute units in CSS and not providing an alrernate mechanism for resizing text"
>  
> I think this certainly could on the based on the audience for the device.  For example, HTML based emails may not provide the same control as a browser.  Or perhaps browsers on mobile devices may not provide the same full page zoom that is offered in IE and Firefox.  It would be based on the environment where the content would be accessed.
>  
> The biggest hole that I see in that sites like skittles.com appear to  set overflow to hidden on containers that even when zoom is used no scroll bars appear.  The SC 1.4.4 indicates that browsers should add these but if the author has indicated overflow hidden then it seems like this is an authoring issue and not a user agent issue.  What do others think about this overflow hidden challenge?
>  
> Jonathan
Received on Monday, 31 October 2011 05:23:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 31 October 2011 05:23:51 GMT