- From: Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 14:03:43 -0700
- To: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
1.3.1 should guarantee this. However there is a powerful failure F2 that states: F1: Failure of Success Criterion 1.3.1 due to using changes in text presentation to convey information without using the appropriate markup or text. The example refers to bold text using CSS with a span. Does this mean that the following are also required in the same way? <i>, <small>, <tt>, <abbr>, <cite>, <code>, <dfn>, <em>, <kbd>, <strong>, <samp>, <time>, <var>, <a>, <q>, <sub> and <sup> Knowing that the author indents an author intends a certain inline meaning to the text enables user centered display. I think element level customization is 1.3.1 for low vision, but I'm not sure the WCAG WG accepts the need for semantic inline. Consider the example of <small>. This may be displayed as small type for some authoring reason, but small type isn't good for people with visual acuity loss. Having the element enables another font or text style. <abbr> may not fit into this because there is the definition of the abbreviation to consider. Think this over, and please comment. Wayne
Received on Monday, 31 October 2016 21:04:56 UTC