W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: Responses to Tantek Çelik issues raisedduring third last call of UAAG 1.0

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 15:47:13 -0400
Message-ID: <3B4A0A41.D5490322@w3.org>
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
CC: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Jon Gunderson wrote:
> 
> Tantek,
> The checkpoint currently does not set a box size.  Your argument for 9
> pixels seems satisfactory to me.  I know we considered having this type of
> information in the note.  I am not sure why we did not include it.  Ian do
> remember why we didn't include this information in the note?

It's in the techniques document only.

 _ Ian
 
> At 12:04 PM 7/9/2001 -0700, Tantek Celik wrote:
> >From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
> >Subject: Re: Responses to Tantek Çelik issues raisedduring third last call
> >of UAAG 1.0
> >Date: Mon, Jul 9, 2001, 7:44 AM
> >
> > > But there is no need to allow the user in this case [8x8 pixels] to
> > decrease
> > > the font size.
> > >
> > > Since there is no accessibility requirement for smaller sizes, no priority
> > > is associated with adding this capability to a browser.
> >
> >Good.  I will take this to mean that it is ok for the font size preference
> >in a UA to have a lower limit of 8 pixels.
> >
> >As an example, currently in IE5/Mac we have both the ability to set the
> >default medium font size (in pixels) and the resolution of the display
> >(since the Macintosh provides no capability in the operating system for
> >doing so).  IE5/Mac also provides the ability to instantly "zoom" the size
> >of all text on any page through its easily accessible "Text Zoom" menu.
> >
> >Our font size preference is a menu of typical/popular options
> >(12,14,16,18,24) and an "Other..." option which allows the user to enter
> >their preferred default medium font size.  If the user enters a size less
> >than 9, the value is set to 9.  This was based upon input from Todd Fahrner,
> >a screen font/typography expert who noted that 9 pixels is really the
> >practical minimum for readable text (8 pixels being too small).
> >
> > >From my understanding of this discussion, IE5/Mac would NOT be considered to
> >be compliant with this checkpoint (despite having perhaps the most
> >comprehensive user control over font size and screen resolution of available
> >visual web browsers as noted in numerous reviews).
> >
> >Also from my understanding of this discussion, if we changed this lower
> >bound to 8, then we would be compliant with this checkpoint.
> >
> >I'd like to ask the (perhaps rhetorical) question, who would be helped by
> >this change?
> >
> >Either way, I'd like to suggest that a parenthetical comment be added to the
> >checkpoint description summarizing what you said about western characters
> >and 8 pixels (or my suggestion: 9 pixels) being the effective limit of
> >readability.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Tantek
> >
> >----------
> > >From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
> > >To: "Tantek Celik" <tantek@CS.Stanford.EDU>, "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
> > >Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
> > >Subject: Re: Responses to Tantek Çelik issues raisedduring third  last
> > call of
> >UAAG 1.0
> > >Date: Mon, Jul 9, 2001, 7:44 AM
> > >
> >
> > > It was difficult for the working group to come up with a required minimum
> > > size for many reasons, including internationalization issues.  It can be
> > > assumed for western characters that are visually rendered in a box less
> > > than 8x8 pixels it would be difficult or impossible for most people to
> > > read.  If an author specified a font size that resulted in a graphical
> > > rendering in a box less that 8x8 pixels box accessibility requirement would
> > > be to increase the text size (probably needed for everyone) to one that is
> > > readable.  But there is no need to allow the user in this case to decrease
> > > the font size.
> > >
> > > Since there is no accessibility requirement for smaller sizes, no priority
> > > is associated with adding this capability to a browser.
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > >
> > > At 02:13 AM 7/9/2001 -0700, Tantek Celik wrote:
> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > Issue 512: Checkpoint 4.1: Range of text sizes
> > >> > http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc3.html#512
> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> >
> > >> > Issue summary: Is it a P1 requirement to allow configuration of very
> > >> > small text sizes?
> > >> >
> > >> > Resolution:
> > >> >
> > >> >  - The UAWG agrees that the intent of this checkpoint is to allow the
> > >> >  user to choose large, not small, text sizes.
> > >> >
> > >> >  - However, after consultation with other Working Groups, the UAWG
> > >> >  concluded that, in light of internationalization issues (and others),
> > >> >  the WG could not come up with a lower bound on the requirement
> > >> >  with any confidence.
> > >> >
> > >> >  - Therefore, the WG resolved to leave the checkpoint as is with a
> > >> >    note in the Techniques document:
> > >> >
> > >> >    <BLOCKQUOTE>
> > >> >     The primary intention of this checkpoint is to allow users with
> > >> >     low vision to increase the size of text. Full configurability
> > >> >     includes the choice of (very) small text sizes that may be
> > >> >     available, though this is not considered by the User Agent
> > >> >     Accessibility Guidelines Working Group to be part of the priority
> > >> >     1 requirement.  This checkpoint does not include a "lower bound"
> > >> >     (above which text sizes would be required) because of how users'
> > >> >     needs may vary across writing systems and hardware.
> > >> >    </BLOCKQUOTE>
> > >>
> > >>I would like to point out that the reason I raised this issue is that some
> > >>very small text sizes are illegible (e.g. anything less than 9px
> > >>unsmoothed), and therefore, it may be preferable for a UA to set a "lower
> > >>bound" for the purposes of avoiding "unusable" configurations.
> > >>
> > >>Is it a P2 (or P3) requirement to permit users to configure the size of
> > text
> > >>to such illegible sizes?
> > >>
> > >>Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
> > > Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
> > > Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
> > > MC-574
> > > College of Applied Life Studies
> > > University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
> > > 1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL  61820
> > >
> > > Voice: (217) 244-5870
> > > Fax: (217) 333-0248
> > >
> > > E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
> > >
> > > WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
> > > WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
> > >
> > >
> 
> Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
> Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
> Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
> MC-574
> College of Applied Life Studies
> University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
> 1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL  61820
> 
> Voice: (217) 244-5870
> Fax: (217) 333-0248
> 
> E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
> 
> WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
> WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua

-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Cell:                    +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 9 July 2001 15:50:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:58 GMT