Re: Simplifying popup interference

This is excellent.

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Repsher, Stephen J <
stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:

> Laura, you win ;).  I'm a sucker for facts and data...
>
>
>
> Perhaps this is also a way to include mandating that I should be able to
> move my mouse onto the popup (per the adjacency loophole in a previous
> message).  Consider the following rewrite to tighten things up and
> distinguish hover vs. focus:
>
>
>
> *Popup Interference:* Except where popup presentation is controlled by
> the user agent, all of the following are true when popup content is visible:
>
> ·       *Trigger*: Popup content does not render any part of its
> triggering content invisible.
>
> ·       *Hover:* If a popup is triggered via pointer hover, then the
> pointer may be moved onto the popup content without loss of visibility.
>
> ·       *Focus:* Popup content remains visible while any of its
> components, including the trigger, have focus.
>
>
>
> Where we define popup as " becomes visible only on pointer hover or focus”.
>
>
>
> What’s the score?  What does everyone think?  Any inaccessible gaps?
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com]
>
> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 3:04 PM
>
> To: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>
>
> Cc: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>; public-low-vision-a11y-tf <
> public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
>
> Subject: Re: Simplifying popup interference
>
>
>
> Hi Steve and all,
>
>
>
> Steve wrote:
>
>
>
> > I could certainly live with bullets how you stated them though because
>
> > of the lack of unnecessary repetition.
>
>
>
> Breaking up SC text and adding bullets improves readability.
>
>
>
> For example per the Readability Test Tool [1] the proposed sentence [2]
> has an average grade level of about 16. It should be understood by
>
> 21 to 22 year olds.
>
>
>
> Detailed results:
>
>
>
> * Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease: 26.3
>
> * Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 18.3
>
> * Gunning Fog Score: 17.4
>
> * SMOG Index: 10.1
>
> * Coleman Liau Index: 13.8
>
> * Automated Readability Index: 19.8
>
>
>
> The bulleted list [3] has an average grade level of about 8. It should be
> understood by 13 to 14 year olds.
>
>
>
> Detailed results:
>
>
>
> * Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease: 56.9
>
> * Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 7.7
>
> * Gunning Fog Score: 8
>
> * SMOG Index: 6
>
> * Coleman Liau Index: 11.4
>
> * Automated Readability Index: 5.1
>
>
>
> The Nielsen Norman Group explains more about how bullets aid usability in
> the article, "7 Tips for Presenting Bulleted Lists in Digital Content." [5]
> In an older study they found "People look at lists with bullets more often
> than lists without bullets". [6]
>
>
>
> Kindest Regards,
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> ---
>
> [1]
>
> https://www.webpagefx.com/tools/read-able/check.php
>
> [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-
> tf/2017Jul/0085.html
>
> [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-
> tf/2017Jul/0084.html
>
> [4] 7 Tips for Presenting Bulleted Lists in Digital Content [5]
> https://www.nngroup.com/reports/how-people-read-web-eyetracking-evidence/
>
>
>
> On 7/21/17, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> > Laura, excellent point about the incorrectness of saying "presented".
>
> > I don't think "modified by the author" is really applicable here
>
> > though unless I'm missing something?  If the only catch is title
>
> > tooltips, the author has no control over the presentation at all.
>
> >
>
> > Regarding using cursor instead of pointer, I initially agreed then had
>
> > to rewrite this reply.  Usually, but not always for sure, "pointer"
>
> > will generically refer to the thing that moves with the mouse, while
> "cursor"
>
> > refers to the position of the possibly blinking text insertion or
>
> > selection point.  I believe the MATF new guideline is and some
>
> > criteria are using the former, right?
>
> >
>
> > Correcting the exception though with a slight tweak on yours to
>
> > actually mention popups in the exception, maybe:
>
> >
>
> > " Except where the popup presentation is controlled by the user agent,
>
> > popup content does not render any of its triggering content invisible,
>
> > and remains visible while pointer hover or focus is on the popup
> content."
>
> >
>
> > Where we define popup as " becomes visible only on pointer hover or
> focus”.
>
> >
>
> > I could certainly live with bullets how you stated them though because
>
> > of the lack of unnecessary repetition.
>
> >
>
> > Steve
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com]
>
> > Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 1:00 PM
>
> > To: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>; Jim Allan
>
> > <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
>
> > Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
>
> > Subject: Re: Simplifying popup interference
>
> >
>
> > Hi Steve, Jim, and all,
>
> >
>
> > Here is another idea for rewording:
>
> >
>
> > Except where determined by the user agent and not modified by the
>
> > author, popup content
>
> >
>
> > 1. Does not render any of its triggering content invisible.
>
> > 2. Remains visible while pointer hover or focus is on the popup content.
>
> >
>
> > Would we want to consider swapping out the word "pointer" to "cursor"
>
> > to be more generic and cover other types of cursors?
>
> >
>
> > Thanks.
>
> >
>
> > Kindest Regards,
>
> > Laura
>
> >
>
> > On 7/21/17, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> >> Hey Jim,
>
> >>
>
> >> User agent control (e.g. title attribute tooltips) is something I
>
> >> forgot to add, so good catch.
>
> >>
>
> >> Regarding focus inside the popup… First, I was trying to simplify by
>
> >> not saying it needs to stay visible while hover or focus is on the
>
> >> trigger because that’s inherent in the popup, right?  In other words,
>
> >> if it appears on hover or focus of a trigger, then of course it stays
>
> >> visible until that is removed (unless authors are out there building
>
> >> timers into that content…hmm…).
>
> >>
>
> >> But really, I think we need to consider focus within a popup because
>
> >> I find they contain links all the time.  The biggest example is a
>
> >> navigation menu that works only on hover and focus.  Consider this
>
> >> scenario:
>
> >>
>
> >> 1.       Extra content with a few toggles or links appear.
>
> >>
>
> >> 2.       I cannot see it that well so I realize I click down and miss my
>
> >> target, so I move my pointer away before letting the button come up
>
> >> so nothing is activated.
>
> >>
>
> >> 3.       Now focus is inside the popup and not on the trigger, so if the
>
> >> content disappears then I need to start all over again, reorient my
>
> >> vision to the menu, etc.  I only have one chance to get it right.  If
>
> >> it stays visible, I have the chance to correct my mistake much more
>
> >> easily, especially if I don’t need to worry about where my mouse is
>
> >> at that point.
>
> >>
>
> >> I think it was Gmail that used to have a menu where this happened to
>
> >> me all the time.
>
> >>
>
> >> I’m not in favor of elongating the wording to bullets unless it
>
> >> really adds clarity, so assuming you agree with my focus argument,
>
> >> how about
>
> >> just:
>
> >>
>
> >> “Except for popups presented by the user agent, popup content does
>
> >> not render any of its triggering content invisible, and remains
>
> >> visible while pointer hover or focus is on the popup content.”
>
> >>
>
> >> Now that I’m thinking about it again, what if the author creates a
>
> >> popup that doesn’t appear directly adjacent to the trigger?  In that
>
> >> scenario, I’d have no way to move my mouse onto it without it
>
> >> disappearing.  Should we worry about that?  Anyone come across that
>
> >> in practice?
>
> >>
>
> >> Steve
>
> >>
>
> >> From: Jim Allan [mailto:jimallan@tsbvi.edu]
>
> >> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 4:31 PM
>
> >> To: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>
>
> >> Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
>
> >> Subject: Re: Simplifying popup interference
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Repsher, Stephen J
>
> >> <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>>
>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> ​<snip>​
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> If not, here’s some simplified wording perhaps to restart the engine:
>
> >>
>
> >> Popup Interference:
>
> >> ​​
>
> >> Popup content does not render any of its triggering content
>
> >> invisible, and remains visible while pointer hover or focus is on the
> popup content.
>
> >>
>
> >> ​Popup Interference:
>
> >> For content that appears on hover or focus, the following are true:
>
> >> 1. ​
>
> >> ​
>
> >> Popup content does not render any of its triggering content invisible
>
> >> 2. Popup content remains visible while the pointer is on the popup
>
> >> content or focus is on the triggering content
>
> >>
>
> >> ​Except where
>
> >>
>
> >>   1.  User agent control: The
>
> >> ​popup is ​
>
> >> determined by the user agent and
>
> >> ​is
>
> >>  not modified by the author
>
> >> ​.​
>
> >> Reworded the second clause to cover different behavior for hover
>
> >> pointer, and focus. Focus would stay on the triggering content and
>
> >> the pointer is free to move around. the only way I can think that
>
> >> focus would get into popup content is if the popup is a modal type
> window...
>
> >> which is different from popup that are transient. That is, content
>
> >> that does not need a specific close mechanism ([x] on modal windows).
>
> >> The exception covers the "title" attribute popups and pointer
>
> >> obscuring popup
>
> >>
>
> >> Jim
>
> >>
>
> >> And where we define popup as “becomes visible only on pointer hover
>
> >> or focus”.
>
> >>
>
> >> Critique away…
>
> >>
>
> >> Steve
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> --
>
> >> Jim Allan, Accessibility Coordinator
>
> >> Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
>
> >> 1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
>
> >> voice 512.206.9315 <(512)%20206-9315><tel:(512)%20206-9315>    fax:
>
> >> 512.206.9264 <(512)%20206-9264><tel:(512)%20206-9264>
> http://www.tsbvi.edu/ "We shape
>
> >> our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > Laura L. Carlson
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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