- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:00:09 -0600
- To: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
- Cc: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, Lisa Seeman <lseeman@us.ibm.com>
Hi all, I started a Wiki page so we don't lose the growing list of attributes. It is at https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Personalization_Requirements Please add content. Edit at will! Kindest Regards, Laura On 1/31/17, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote: > Maybe you could make a page on the LVTF wiki for personalization > requirements with suggested values? I do not want lose some in my inbox.... > > > Also can we have 5 recommended settings for each one. These will be used for > test case...However we can have user settings per role or type. So you > might want borders and margins on buttons and not on links etc, > > > > > Take a look at the json file at > https://github.com/ayelet-seeman/coga.personalisation/blob/JSON-Script/json_profile_1.json > > > we could have an coga function inheriting the button characteristics and > define them > > > Anyway, this is great stuff, thanks > > > All the best > > Lisa Seeman > > LinkedIn, Twitter > > > > > > ---- On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 21:03:36 +0200 Jim Allan<jimallan@tsbvi.edu> > wrote ---- > > In addition to Laura's list, and Glenda's disabled element, also consider > > lowvision-fontsize > lowvison-reflow > > lowvision-hyphenate > > lowvision-justification > > lowvision-margins > > lowvision-borders > > lowvision-element-spacing > > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Laura Carlson > <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Lisa, > > Interesting. Are you thinking of adding attributes for low vision that > would address 79, 78, and 74 such as: > > lowvision-fontfamily > lowvision-foreground > lowvision-background > lowvision-lineheight > lowvision-letterspacing > lowvision-wordspacing > > > > Thank you! > > Kindest regards, > Laura > > On 1/30/17, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote: > > Hi Alistair and Low Vision task force > > > > We are working on a full personalization architecture and will have a > free > > browser extension > > > > We will have a specification for both the semantics and the > personalization > > settings https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/ it is under > the > > aria working group. > > A first open implementation is at > > https://github.com/ayelet-seeman/coga.personalisation and there is a > demo at > > > http://rawgit.com/ayelet-seeman/coga.personalisation/demo/conactUs.html > > IBM and Pearson are saying they intend also to implement it (although > > clearly I can not commit for either of them by CR it should have at > least 2 > > implementations ) > > > > Should someone from the low vision task force coordinate with me to > ensure > > LV personalization settings are fully addressed? > > > > Also than you can add personalization as a technique. This makes it > much > > easier to make it widely applicable. > > > > We are addressing the testing burden by having a maximum of 5 > recommended > > settings per user setting. So developers can test all recomended > settings by > > testing against 5 templates. > > > > All the best > > > > Lisa Seeman > > > > LinkedIn, Twitter > > > > > > > > > > > > ---- On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:16:54 +0200 Alastair > > Campbell&lt;acampbell@nomensa.com&gt; wrote ---- > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > Thinking about the(se) adaptation Success Criteria, I really think > the > > process is more important than the SC text at this stage. > > > > As I outlined before: > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017JanMar/0418.html > > > > I think we need an *open* process to test the limits of what a > user-side > > script or extension can do, to find out what authors can reasonably > do. > > > > These things are not new, the Opera browser used to have > user-stylesheets > > that adjusted colours, layouts etc. There are extensions now that pull > out > > content and re-format it. But there is no standard, no one has tried > to > > define it in an open way. > > > > We need to have a preliminary requirement (SC text), then test, write > and > > test again. > > > > If we don’t have an initial stake in the ground (of the SC text) then > there > > is no point putting the effort into testing and writing techniques, > but if > > we do, we have a plan and the SC text can be modified later based on > the > > results. > > > > Cheers, > > > > -Alastair > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Laura L. Carlson > > > > > > -- > Jim Allan, Accessibility Coordinator > > Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired > 1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756 > voice 512.206.9315 fax: 512.206.9264 http://www.tsbvi.edu/ > "We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2017 15:00:59 UTC