Re: Anything for a possible 2.2?

Post Script:
I have tried this on CJK Languages, Arabic, Vietnamese and Western
Languages. All that is needed is to have members from each country to
supply a test set of characters. For latin languages the test set is:

!"#$% &'()* +,-./ 01234 56789 :;<=> ?@ABC DEFGH IJKLM NOPQR STUVW XYZ[
]^_`a bcdef ghijk lmnop qrstu vwxyz {|}~

Best, Wayne


On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:10 AM Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com> wrote:

> The ability to change font is important. I believe something like this
> would impact developers very little:
> Normalized change of font.
> If the user adjusts font size so that the average character width is 0.5em
> for 1em font-size, then the user may change font to whatever family they
> choose.
>
> Example: Suppose you choose Verdana width for 1em is 0.576em to replace
> Times New Roman width for 1em is 4.718. Multiplying the font size of
> Verdana by  0.8680 = 0.5/0.576 gives 0.8680 em.
> The character width is 0.4994em really 0.5. Now the normalized Verdana
> exceeds the size of Times New Roman by 0.05em. See
> http://nosetothepage.org/TextAccessibility/FontCompare.html.
>
> To handle icon font problem caution users to avoid the i and span element
> in font family change. Caution authors to use role="img". For math just
> have users avoid math like p:not(math p).
>
> For users also caution to avoid the * selector favoring explicit selectors
> like:
>
> html, body, div, /*span,*/ applet, object, iframe, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6,
> p, blockquote, pre, a, abbr, acronym, address, big, cite, code, del, dfn,
> em, font, img, ins, kbd, q, s, samp, small, strike, strong, sub, sup, tt,
> var, b, u, /*i,*/ center, dl, dt, dd, ol, ul, li, fieldset, form, label,
> legend, table, caption, tbody, tfoot, thead, tr, th, td{
> font-family:"Lucida Sans Unicode", "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;
> }
> (generated mechnaically)
>
> Access to font is pretty easy.
>
> I am willing to make my font normalization programs open source.
>
> Wayne
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:58 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jim (and LVTF),
>>
>>
>>
>> Pre-TPAC, it would be useful to know if there are any potential SCs you’d
>> consider for a WCAG 2.2?
>>
>>
>>
>> We haven’t determined whether the group will tackle that yet, but part of
>> the decision would be: Is it useful to do a 2.2?
>>
>>
>>
>> Looking back, I couldn’t see much in the LVTF ‘defer’ list here:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+label%3ALVTF+label%3ADefer+
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Printing customised text perhaps?
>>
>>
>>
>> Given the shape of 2.1 now, are there gaps or things to tighten up that
>> can work in the 2.x structure?
>>
>> Perhaps a couple of additional SCs that tighten up current ones?
>>
>>
>>
>> If there are others that didn’t make it to a github issue in the first
>> place, now is the time to say so.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m not sure who’s attending TPAC, but if there’s a short overview of 1-6
>> SCs I can run through them which would be very useful for the discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> -Alastair
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> www.nomensa.com
>> tel: +44 (0)117 929 7333 / 07970 879 653
>> follow us: @we_are_nomensa or me: @alastc
>> Nomensa Ltd. King William House, 13 Queen Square, Bristol BS1 4NT
>>
>>
>>
>> Company number: 4214477 | UK VAT registration: GB 771727411
>>
>