- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 07:12:08 -0500
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Hi Alastair, Welcome! It's great to have you with us. And yes, I think we need to prioritize. Kindest Regards, Laura On 9/28/16, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm looking forward to my first LVTF call, I've been trying to catch up. > > I hope I can bring a fresh perspective, I’m going to make some fairly bold > suggestions to start with but please take them as suggestions or questions. > I might have misunderstood, and I’m happy to be corrected. > > Going through the proposed Success Criteria, they appear to fall into two > main categories: > > 1. SCs that authors can achieve now with (fairly) standard techniques. > 2. SCs that require either customization controls in the website, or new > user-agent functionality. > > As a 'dot release' of WCAG (emphasis on Content), any new SC for 2.1 will > need to fit the same constraints as WCAG 2.0. Hopefully that is written down > somewhere, as googling "WCAG success criteria criteria" isn't very helpful, > but I'm sure I've seen something from Gregg V on it before. > > I wasn't directly involved, but I'm fairly sure that any potential > requirements for WCAG 2.0 that required customization controls in the > website were dropped, toned down, or made AAA level. It is not 'reasonable' > to require every website to build customization controls in, so WCAG has > historically walked a line of making sure requirements could be fulfilled by > good authoring practices and user-agent features. > > For example, 1.3.1 is about using structure to represent the design, which > can be achieved in several ways but the easiest is to use the right > structure for the job (e.g. headings in HTML). > > I'm not saying that any of the SCs should be dropped, but there are some > that will be far easier to add to WCAG 2.1 than others. Some might be > adjusted and be suitable for 2.1 / 2.2, and some might be best done as part > of the Silver effort. > > The ones I would suggest prioritizing for 2.1 are: > • Seeing All Interface Elements > • Size of All Content > • Text Size > • Reflow to Single Column > • Contrast: Informational Graphics > • Contrast: Interactive Elements > • (Respect) user settings. > > Those are the ones that stand out as possible for authors to achieve now > (with some adjustment to the wording). > > The following SCs appear to be achievable in browsers now, so either I've > not understood the or you are aiming to make it something websites should > support? > • Font family > • Text colors > • Text style (maybe) > > These SCs appear to require user-agent functionality, I cannot see how a > website would achieve these without a lot of expensive customization: > • Capitalization > • Reflow to Single Column > • Hyphenation > • Justification > • Margins > • Printing Customized Text > • Spacing > • Element Level Customization > > There is more to go through on the detail of some of them, but I wanted to > start with a method of prioritizing some SCs to focus on for December. > > Kind regards, > > -Alastair > -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2016 12:12:38 UTC