Re: Deal with the word "essential" now or tackle it later?

I agree with the note, and I can live without "essential". I would in that
case interpret "content of functionality" to not include minor problems
that don't interfere with getting the information and using the page ...


Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Mobile:  613.806.9005

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 Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi David and all,
>
> As mentioned on issue 576, based on an evaluation of 67 pages [1]
> tested between July 25 and August 3, 2017 that included top 50 Alexa
> pages and some smaller pages, the combined metrics specified in the
> Adapting Text SC should be feasible in WCAG 2.1 for HTML documents.
> Spacing is able to adapt without loss of content or functionality
> across a wide range of sites. In addition, recently 9 mega menus [2]
> were tested and passed the SC.
>
> As you know the Working Group will be going through the implementation
> process and demonstrating the implementability of all the new SCs. If
> you know of examples in the wild of text in UI - (e.g. menus, etc)
> where it would not be possible to meet the SC, please add them to
> issue 576. We can tag that issue with the "Implementation Follow-up"
> label to ensure that it is re-reviewed at that point in the process.
>
> But with that said, David, could you live with the current text that
> removes the word "essential", if we added an editor's note such as:
>
> "Editors Note: The Working Group seeks examples in the wild of text
> content outside of blocks of text where it would be impossible to meet
> this SC. The SC's scope may be narrowed based upon implementation
> testing."
>
> For reference the current proposed SC text [3] reads:
>
> <quote>
> Success Criterion 1.4.13 Text Spacing
>
> If the technologies being used allow the user agent [4] to set text
> [5] style properties [6], then no loss of content or functionality
> occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style
> property:
>
> * Line height (line spacing) to at least 1.5 times the font size;
> * Spacing underneath paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size;
> * Letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 times the font size;
> * Word spacing to at least 0.16 times the font size.
>
> <end quote>
>
> Thank you.
>
> Kindest Regards,
> Laura
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Results_of_Bookmarklet_
> Tests_for_Issue_78
> [2]https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/576#issuecomment-345843140
> [3] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Comment_Summary_1-4-13#SC_Text
> [4] https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-user-agent
> [5] https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-text
> [6] https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-style-properties
>
> On 11/14/17, David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com> wrote:
> >> My concern is that “nothing important is lost” risks making the SC not
> > reliably testable. I would prefer to avoid such language. By doing so,
> > accessibility is also enhanced.
> >
> > I agree that testability is always a concern. However, without a
> qualifier,
> > then any minor artifacts in the transition will fail WCAG. If we remove
> > essential and don't replace it with another qualifier, then I think it
> > should be limited to "blocks of text"
> > https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/576
> >
> > We've had 2 reputable commenters who are veteran full time accessibility
> > professionals and testers, ask that this SC get changed to "Blocks of
> > Text",
> >  Jan Richards of the IDRC <https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/551>,
> and
> > Aiden
> > from TD Bank <https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/469>.
> > I'd like to add my voice to that concern. I was the author of SC 1.4.8 in
> > WCAG 2.0. And the "blocks of text" language was carefully negotiated, I
> > never could have got through without that. I think we should carefully
> > consider "Blocks of Text". Without that, there are a lot of variables,
> and
> > possible confusion. It might become a stumbling block for the SC in CR.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David MacDonald
> >
> >
> >
> > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
> > Mobile:  613.806.9005
> >
> > 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 Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:37 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote:
> >
> >> My concern is that “nothing important is lost” risks making the SC not
> >> reliably testable. I would prefer to avoid such language. By doing so,
> >> accessibility is also enhanced.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david@can-adapt.com]
> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 14, 2017 9:30 AM
> >> *To:* Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
> >> *Cc:* Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>; White, Jason J <
> >> jjwhite@ets.org>; Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>;
> WCAG
> >> <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> >> *Subject:* Re: Deal with the word "essential" now or tackle it later?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't think we want to loose the idea that "some" loss of content and
> >> functionality is acceptable as long as nothing important is lost.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> David MacDonald
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
> >>
> >> Mobile:  613.806.9005 <(613)%20806-9005>
> >>
> >> LinkedIn
> >>
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdavidmacdonald100&data=
> 02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%
> 7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=
> Lir2vskakn6MX2frF8w6y4JbAcCu8fxJ9Qwb9Cgb300%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >> twitter.com/davidmacd
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=Elps11ImTbCTeuk3mmmINFY5H7ANDz
> aJTZK9gD1liPA%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >> GitHub
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FDavidMacDonald&data=02%7C01%
> 7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%
> 7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=
> DAmBgc3O%2FNy3QlufeouMu33tedymPTWeOBo%2B1%2BcI6AQ%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >> www.Can-Adapt.com
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.can-adapt.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=KV0lh06nLBDfm1q2sdulGjq6Qe6IbO
> LEHuOzTuhJ8AA%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *  Adapting the web to all users*
> >>
> >> *            Including those with disabilities*
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidmacd.com%2Fdisclaimer.html&data=02%
> 7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%
> 7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=
> SHmjoeBrQIoI1I3kn%2BLYFG8CFgOhY39ru0q3kw4PL%2BE%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Laura Carlson <
> >> laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jason, David, Andrew, Steve, and all,
> >>
> >> Regarding the latest proposed adapting text SC text, Jason wrote [1]:
> >> >> It doesn't eliminate the use of the word "essential", which is not
> >> >> here
> >> used in accordance with its WCAG definition.
> >>
> >> David wrote [2]:
> >> > That word is in both proposals so I think we should consider that
> >> separately... perhaps you can file an issue on github.​
> >>
> >> It seems we already have an open issue for Use of "essential" for
> >> several SCs including adapting text. It is #372 [3].
> >>
> >> Andrew, Issue 372 wasn't listed for Adapting Text  SC (or any of the
> >> others) in your November 6 email [4] so I didn't add to the the Wiki
> >> page with the rest of proposals for resolving Adapting Text issues
> >> [5]. Should I add it to the Wiki page? Or should we deal with Issue
> >> 372 later?
> >>
> >> On September 25, Steve commented in Issue 372 regarding the use of the
> >> word "essential" in the Adapting Text SC. He said [6]:
> >>
> >> "The criterion refers to "no loss of essential content or
> >> functionality". The word seems to have been introduced by @awkawk in a
> >> comment way back in March [7], but I could not find any rationale for
> >> its inclusion in the language (i.e. an example of content loss that
> >> would be acceptable). Given this, and the fact that both Resize Text
> >> and Zoom Content refer to "loss of content or functionality" without
> >> using essential, I propose to simply remove the word from this SC."
> >>
> >> Andrew and all, would you be able to live with removing the word
> >> essential from the SC?
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
> >> Kindest Regards,
> >> Laura
> >>
> >> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017OctDec/
> 0376.html
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-
> gl%2F2017OctDec%2F0376.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=gPwzB5W4eBS3GtUOFn3zkoFkL6xahJ
> J4%2BmlC%2F%2FVxkAo%3D&reserved=0>
> >> [2]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017OctDec/0374.html
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-
> gl%2F2017OctDec%2F0374.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=cT0UhrvKsF0t5IUWBk8F6xRpIy%
> 2Fqh9ncj7M3%2BxJrS8s%3D&reserved=0>
> >> [3] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/372
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F372&
> data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%
> 7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=
> gagg72um8D90V1Wo59oTQu4pdDddMx19x%2Fn0a413tPk%3D&reserved=0>
> >> [4] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017OctDec/
> 0313.html
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-
> gl%2F2017OctDec%2F0313.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=XLm%2FxtYIeB3ZqrZaYDfGxWvBj0okkd2Q
> UBcL3Vu6%2Fo0%3D&reserved=0>
> >> [5]
> >> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Comment_Summary_1-4-13
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FComment_
> Summary_1-4-13&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=5uk17yXjWGErchrzKJvhwXLoJYne6G
> DY5U6OZ536r2M%3D&reserved=0>
> >> [6] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/372#issuecomment-331950411
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F372%
> 23issuecomment-331950411&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=JISpZMF9yF9tGJGJd5Xu8BhDIqu%
> 2BogD01ukBRb%2BxOmE%3D&reserved=0>
> >> [7] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-289792275
> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F78%
> 23issuecomment-289792275&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%
> 7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e
> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=sspSef%
> 2BcIJClGUIh2lOnmT4YzSm4IkJeCJ4YaA1RiZI%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Laura L. Carlson
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> >> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for
> whom
> >> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this
> >> e-mail
> >> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute,
> or
> >> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and
> >> delete
> >> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
> >>
> >> Thank you for your compliance.
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> Laura L. Carlson
>