- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 14:37:26 -0500
- To: "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>
- Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Hi Steve and all, The mechanism wording gets extreme push back [1] [2][3]. I doubt we would ever get consensus on it at AA. I am thinking of pursuing the 2 SC idea that was proposed on today's AG call [4]. Jason White had previously mentioned it [5]. We would have 2 Adapting Text SC's. One at level AA. And one at level AAA. * For AA we could use the current language, which is Proposal C with maybe a minor tweak or 2. https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-290810047 * For AAA we could your mechanism language for the first sentence or something close to it. https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-291567555 Thoughts? Thank again, Steve. Much appreciated. Kindest Regards, Laura [1] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-268626340 [2] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-268651663 [3] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-269208353 [4] https://www.w3.org/2017/04/04-ag-minutes.html#item06 [5] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-289516216 On 4/4/17, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote: > Hi folks, > > I posted this comment to the GitHub issue, but I wanted to also share here > to perhaps get quick LVTF consensus before any additional discussion > Thursday. What do you think? > > "I'd like to suggest new compromised wording to address the following > concerns: > * No client-support for full adaptation (e.g. mobile) > * Potential requirement to create a widget (or otherwise make the content > author responsible for the actual adaptation) > * Consistency with language and wider applicability of WCAG 2.0 > How about we change: > > Each of the following text styles of the page can be overridden with no loss > of essential content or functionality. > > To > > No loss of essential content or functionality occurs when a mechanism > overrides any of the following text styles: > > Basically, we directly make it about what does or does not happen when > simple adaptations are made, and require nothing about where that adaptation > comes from. If all browsers, assistive technologies, platform settings, etc. > suddenly stopped supporting the usual ways low vision folks accomplish this, > developers could still meet this SC." > > PS - I also commented about where MathML content fits in here. Some styles > are not applicable (e.g. font or word-spacing), but others are important > (e.g. color). Any thoughts there would also be appreciated. Thanks. > > Steve -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 4 April 2017 19:38:01 UTC