Re: adapting-text SC rewrite

I've read through the entire thread, and I'm not sure that we're
accomplishing much with the SC.

- We've established that some browsers provide a way to override the author
style sheets while other make it more difficult, in WCAG we only need one
affordable stack to be relied upon to pass conformance
- We've established that on any HTML page, when using certain browsers, we
can override the CSS, including "important".
- We've established that most of this can be done in PDF, and whatever
can't be done, can't be solved in PDF, without the author creating a new
PDF viewer.
- We've established it SHOULD be a user agent issue, and that user agents
SHOULD allow users to do this. Some do most of it (i.e., Edge new Reading
feature)
- It's kind of messy to test,
- There are problems with mentioning specific fonts, and there are problems
with NOT making mentioning fonts. (i.e., different results for different
fonts)
- There is a lot of head scratching about what it means for authors, making
it a difficult SC to understand, and adding cognitive load to the 2.1

It seems hard to fail this in HTML, and hard to test this, confusing to
understand what is required. It just seems to me that this should be punted
to Silver, where User Agents are involved. Unless there is an elegant way
out of the mess and real momentum from stakeholders responding the FPWD.

I'm interested in what other's opinions might be on this.

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> After yesterday's discussion [1], Andrew's proposed rewrite [2] and
> Jon's concerns with the rewrite [3] what do you think about rewriting
> the current adapting-text SC, which is:
>
> No loss of content or functionality on a webpage is caused by overriding:
>
> 1. font family to Verdana, or
> 2. foreground and background to white on black, or
> 3. line height of all text to 1.5, letter spacing to 0.12em, and word
> spacing to 0.16em.
>
> To read:
>
> Either a mechanism exists to adapt textual information or no loss of
> content or functionality exists when:
>
> * font family is overridden by the user.
> * foreground and background colors are overridden by the user.
> * line spacing (leading) is at least space-and-a-half within
> paragraphs, and paragraph spacing is at least 1.5 times larger than
> the line spacing.
> * letter spacing (tracking) is at least 0.12 em, and word spacing is
> at least 0.16 em.
>
> With this approach the offending hard coded metrics are removed and
> the understanding and technique documents will have to provide the
> details.
>
> Patrick and David this version incorporates Andrew's suggestion that
> authors need to create mechanisms (as a last resort)... and just about
> gets us back to where we started.
>
> Thoughts? Ideas for improvement? Is this getting closer to what people
> can live with?
>
> Please reply in the GitHub issue:
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78
>
> Thank you.
>
> Kindest Regards,
> Laura
>
> [1]https://www.w3.org/2017/03/21-ag-minutes.html#item06
> [2]https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-286442673
> [3]https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-286531577
>
> --
> Laura L. Carlson
>