Re: ACTION-2046: CSS-AAM

Cynthia,

The document captures the CSS issues well. I would like call out that -
media queries have a potential to solve some accessibility issues for low
vision users, color blind users and users with a cognitive disability. This
potential should be captured in the doc so the task force can explore
possibilities with the CSS working group. Some potential uses of media
queries - high contrast, graphics for color blind users, graphics for low
vision users, swapping affordances/symbols to symbols a user recognizes.

                                                              
     Regards,                                                 
                                                              
    Fred Esch                                                 
 Watson, IBM, W3C                                             
  Accessibility                                               
                                                              
 IBM Watson       Watson Release Management and Quality       
                                                              






From: Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
To: "public-apa@w3.org" <public-apa@w3.org>
Cc: Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>
Date: 07/12/2016 08:05 PM
Subject: ACTION-2046: CSS-AAM



I’ve created a preliminary list of CSS modules that appear to have
accessibility impacts. I’d like to talk a bit about format and organization
before I move this into the CSS-AAM spec stub.

https://github.com/w3c/aria/wiki/CSS-AAM-Potential-Features


      ·       Some of these are simply about documenting the impact of
      features on accessibility API, so similar to the tables in the other
      AAM docs
      ·       Some of these need authoring advice, which might be WCAG
      techniques and failures, CSS Best Practices, or both.
      ·       Some have features that might be useful for other WCAG or
      COGA techiques

I don’t expect any of those categories to be controversial. There is a fair
bit of work to do, but it’s most documentation of things that work now, and
finding gaps.

The deeper conversations are about

      ·       Reading order, flow, navigation order. What is the right user
      experience when the visual layout and the dom are not in the same
      order? What layers of the accessibility stack should control that
      (AT, AAPI, DOM, Author, some mix of those?).
      ·       Accessibility views and whether media queries and related
      features are a good way to enable authors to optimize for
      accessibility.

There are also some specs that were too big or too dense to cover in an
survey of this many specs. They are called out for more detailed review. It
would be great if people could sign up to look at these in more detail.