W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > August 2013

Re: Allowing for Responsive Design methods ( LC-2811)

From: <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 15:01:31 +0000
Message-Id: <E1VCWOB-0007Wv-Bd@jessica.w3.org>
To: alastc@gmail.com
Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
 Dear alastc@gmail.com,

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group has reviewed the
comments you sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the
Understanding WCAG 2.0 (Public Review Draft) published on 11 Jul 2013.
Thank you for having taken the time to review the document and to send us

The Working Group's response to your comment is included below.

Please review it carefully and let us know by email at
public-comments-wcag20@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 25 August
2013. In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific
solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group. If such a
consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the opportunity to raise a
formal objection which will then be reviewed by the Director during the
transition of this document to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation


For the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group,
Michael Cooper
W3C Staff Contact

 1. http://www.w3.org/mid/E1V9EvD-0004FN-Vq@nelson.w3.org
 2. http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2013/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20130711/


Your comment on :
> Name: Alastair Campbell
> Email: alastc@gmail.com
> Affiliation: Nomensa
> Document: UW
> Item Number: Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.4
> Part of Item: Sufficient Techniques
> Comment Type: general comment
> Summary of Issue: Allowing for Responsive Design methods
> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
> Since WCAG 2 was published there have been two major shifts that affect
> re-sizing things in (desktop) browsers:
> 1. All desktop browsers now default to zoom, where zooming expands
> everything on the page. A browser at 1024px wide would report a width of
> 512px at 200%. 
> 2. Responsive design (where sites re-size based on the reported width of
> the browser) is becoming popular.
> These two methods combined actually work very well for zooming.
> I think we should update the understanding page and sufficient
> techniques to allow for (perhaps even encourage) responsive design
> techniques. 
> More explanation and discussion here:
> http://alastairc.ac/2013/08/browser-zoom-great-for-accessibility/ 
> Proposed Change:
> Overall, I think there should now be two sufficient tests/methods to
> pass:
> 1. Zoom to 200% with no horizontal scrolling or loss of content /
> functionality.
> 2. Text-sizing to 200% without loosing content / functionality.
> Specific points on the text:
> - Encourage the use of techniques that work with user-agents, rather
> than suggesting developers build in text-resizing widgets (paragraph
> 2).
> - Remove references to old/defunct browsers such as IE6 (and Firefox
> also defaults to zoom now) in paragraph 3.
> - In the 'working group feels' paragraph, state that using media queries
> should be used to manage the layout of pages at higher zoom levels.
> In the third example of success criterion:
> - "A user uses a zoom function in his user agent to change the scale of
> the content. All the content scales uniformly, and the media queries
> used on the site prevent horizontal scrolling."
> It would also be good to add a sufficient technique for responsive
> design.
> NB: I am happy to draft a new version of the page and add a technique, I
> just saw the deadline for the call for comments and wanted to get this
> in quickly.

Working Group Resolution (LC-2811):
Thank you for this suggestion Alastair. Yes please go ahead and draft a
technique. Please follow the format of the current techniques. 
We agree that leveraging responsive design sites can help or solve the
horizontal scroll issue. We would not likely be able to include it in this
update, but we update the techniques regularly.

Note: 1.4.8  AAA requires text resizing, but it is also sufficient to meet
1.4.4 already with text resizing.

Received on Thursday, 22 August 2013 15:01:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:14:59 UTC