W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > April 2010

Re: 18 point for image of text

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:51:50 -0700
Message-ID: <r2m824e742c1004231851hb654d87bufb41324b05061c76@mail.gmail.com>
To: makoto.ueki@gmail.com
Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 1:19 AM,  <makoto.ueki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Name: Makoto Ueki
> Email: makoto.ueki@gmail.com
> Affiliation: JIS Working Group
> Document: W2
> Item Number: Success Criterion 1.4.3
> Part of Item:
> Comment Type: question
> Summary of Issue: 18 point for image of text
> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
> Image of text can be different actual size even if an author set "18pt" for it. When using 96ppi, 18pt image of text is large enough to be considered as large scale of text. But when using 72ppi, which is most popular setting among designers, 18pt image of text is smaller than 18pt text(1.5em or 150%).
>
>
>
> See examples at:
>
> http://www.infoaxia.co.jp/WCAG20/SC143/18pt.html
>
>
>
> Which size is 18 point for image of text? Designers are confusing as it is not described in Understanding or any other documents. Some are using 72ppi and others are using 96ppi. Please clarify it.
>
> Proposed Change:
>

================================
Response from the Working Group
================================
You are correct that specifying point sizes from within the
application can be unreliable when it comes to presenting text at a
specific size.

Note 3 of the definition of large scale text in WCAG 2.0 attempts to
address this with the following:

"...For many mainstream body text fonts, 14 and 18 point is roughly
equivalent to 1.2 and 1.5 em or to 120% or 150% of the default size
for body text (assuming that the body font is 100%..."

Using 1.2em and 1.5em as an example, an author would need to use
approximately 19pt and 24pt in Photoshop if using 72ppi to achieve the
intended outcome and present large scale text to the user.

We have added some text to the intent sections of 1.4.3 and 1.4.6 to
clarify this and will include it in a future draft of the
Understanding document.


Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact


On behalf of the WCAG Working Group
Received on Saturday, 24 April 2010 01:52:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:12 UTC