Re: Interactive Widget Nit: Sec 3.2.4

I am also OK with removing the phrase.

I appreciate Mike’s reiterating that a visible interactive widget helps low vision and elderly users, a demographic and use case often overlooked in the overlay debate. That said, we do not need to revisit that debate in this section.



Lionel Wolberger, Ph.D.
VP Business Operations
Level Access
https://levelaccess.com

https://userway.org

________________________________
From: Michael Paciello <michael.paciello@audioeye.com>
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2025 4:50:20 PM
To: Jason Taylor <jason@usablenet.com>
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@a11y.nyc>; Accessibility at the Edge <public-a11yedge@w3.org>; Lionel Wolberger <lionel@userway.org>
Subject: Re: Interactive Widget Nit: Sec 3.2.4

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Thanks for your notes, Jason. Having reviewed Janina's original proposal (and your approval), I too approve the removal of the phrase: "through an interactive widget."

Apologies for complicating the issue.

-Mike

Mike Paciello
Chief Accessibility Officer
michael.paciello@audioeye.com<mailto:michael.paciello@audioeye.com>
+1.603.484.1938

[AudioEye Registered Trademark Logo]
[Follow us on LinkedIn for more accessibility tips!]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/audioeye-inc/>


On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 9:15 AM Jason Taylor <jason@usablenet.com<mailto:jason@usablenet.com>> wrote:
Hi Michael

Could you clarify if you feel we should keep or remove. My feeling is that Janina is referencing how we stress the capabilities covered do not require or add additional UI elements , which this capability references or implies you add a UI element that is not there for other uses, as opposed to updating the code to allow for a users own ability to decide if they want to add something.

However, there is a case for framing this as a “user authorized” technic that is a user decides this is a capability they would like “more ready at hand” than in the browser settings, there is no harm in providing.

Regards

This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are intended only to be read or used by the named addressee(s). It is confidential and contains legally privileged information. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 17, 2025, at 9:07 AM, Michael Paciello <michael.paciello@audioeye.com<mailto:michael.paciello@audioeye.com>> wrote:


This is just my opinion, so take it for what it’s worth:

If we position/acknowledge that a (the) use case for overlay widgets are older adults and uninformed users (i.e., users who are not aware of or know how to set the accessibility settings in their browsers or operating systems), then this issue of removing the term “overlay” becomes moot. More importantly, it removes a significant portion of the argument about overlays and people with disabilities.

Mike


Mike Paciello
Chief Accessibility Officer
michael.paciello@audioeye.com<mailto:michael.paciello@audioeye.com>
+1.603.484.1938

[AudioEye Registered Trademark Logo]
[Follow us on LinkedIn for more accessibility tips!]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/audioeye-inc/>


On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 7:17 AM Jason Taylor <jason@usablenet.com<mailto:jason@usablenet.com>> wrote:
Agree this should be removed
This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are intended only to be read or used by the named addressee(s). It is confidential and contains legally privileged information. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 17, 2025, at 4:08 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@a11y.nyc<mailto:janina@a11y.nyc>> wrote:

Current text has:

Some users need enlarged, or perhaps diminished fonts in order to read content comfortably. This capability allows increased or decreased font size adjustments through an interactive widget.

Q: Is this an exception that proves our no widgets rule? is their objection to removing the phrase: "through an interactive widget?"


--

Janina Sajka (she/her/hers)
Accessibility Consultant https://linkedin.com/in/jsajka


The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures    http://www.w3.org/wai/apa


Linux Foundation Fellow
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/board-of-directors-2/



The information in this communication is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL and/or exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

The information in this communication is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL and/or exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.