Minutes: Low Vision Taskforce telecon 25 July 2019

source: https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html

Low Vision Accessibility Task Force Teleconference25 Jul 2019Attendees
Presentjim, wayne, shawn, laura, andrewRegretsJoAnneChairSV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribeallanj
Contents

   - Topics <https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html#agenda>
      1. Issue resolution - Change to normative text of 1.4.12: at least >
      up to #637 <https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html#item01>
      2. Do you agree with the change to the normative SC text? (yes/no)
      <https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html#item02>
      3. misunderstanding of authors using SC settings as default
      <https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html#item03>
   - Summary of Action Items
   <https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
   - Summary of Resolutions
   <https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary>

------------------------------

tader.info

<laura> http://tader.info/

welcome Andrew to group. introductions

<laura> https://groups.google.com/a/d.umn.edu/forum/#!forum/webdev

<laura> webdev list:
https://groups.google.com/a/d.umn.edu/forum/#!forum/webdev

<scribe> scribe: allanj

close item 1
Issue resolution - Change to normative text of 1.4.12: at least > up to #637

<laura> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/635

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-tf/2019Jul/0016.html

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-tf/2019Jul/0017.html

<shawn> 1.4.12: Text Spacing

<shawn> Line height (line spacing) to at least 1.5 times the font size;

lc: loophole, things may fall apart between authors setting and the .12
user setting

sh: the 'at least' may provide a loop hole that things can fall apart at
less than the 'max'

lc: can this be done in Understanding or make a normative change
... no examples in the wild. Patrick was going to make a failure example

as = Andrew somers

as: tried to create a use case, from css default to 1.4.12 limit. my
understanding is author allows the user to change to SC max.
... what happens when author has X font that exceeds limits of 1.4.12, then
what

<shawn> JA: My understadning is that the author can chhose whatever they
want, and that becomes the base. Then the user change change it that much
more.

<Zakim> JimA, you wanted to say author sets base, user can change from the
base

as: SC needs to state changes relative to author settings
... authors override browser CSS default, user can override author setting
relative to authors esthetics.
... browsers need to cooperate with this.
... letter spacing, contrast etc are relative to the font size, and author
esthetics. user stylesheet and current CSS are a blunt tool

wd: test spacing daily. have issues with grids and tables. have had little
or no issues with letter spacing.
Do you agree with the change to the normative SC text? (yes/no)

<Wayne> no -- understanding

as: comments in 635 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/635

<laura> Before the Working Group changes normative SC text, it would be
good to have information on how an author could create something that would
work at the SC's metrics and fail in between.

<laura> At the AG's July 23, 2019 meeting, @patrickhlauke said he thought
it was possible and kindly offered to put together an example. Before
making a decision, can we see it?

as: issue with SC wording.

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/635#issuecomment-514753884

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say 1. with-WAI-Outreach-Hat-on: Please do not
make the SC more complex for an unproven loop hole. Good to clarify in
Understanding doc, 2.

ack

sh: wai-outreach hat.... please do not make SC more complex - for unproven
loophole. don't make more complex. clarify in understanding
... in reading comment threads. personal hat - sometimes i need higher than
the SC minimums. go to say in Undersading .
... authors do not need to use the settings. this definitely needs to be in
understanding. may need to be in the SC.

lc: +1 to shawn and needing more than the SC limit. don't like "up to"

sh: agrees with no "up to"
... the SC says "at least", if something fails at above SC numbers, it sets
a minimum threshold.

ja: SC are a minimum settings

as: not technically failing if line height is 1.6 and breaks the page. but
must work from 1.5 and below. Authors should feel free to go beyond the
minimum. don't want the SC to be a ceiling.

<laura> suggest adding something such as the following to the
undersrtanding doc:

<laura> "The specified metrics set a minimum baseline. Anything over the
metrics passes and anything under the metrics fails. In addition, values in
between the author's metrics and the metrics specified in this SC should
not have loss of content or functionality."

+1 laura

wd: this seems edge case. add things to understanding.

*RESOLUTION: leave current 1.4.12 SC test as "at least"*
... Change the understanding document for 1.4.12 and LVTF will update the
doc
misunderstanding of authors using SC settings as default

ja: address heavily in Understanding, at the beginning.

<shawn> "In content implemented using markup languages that support the
following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs
by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:"

sh: do we propose a change to SC for 2.2 or not complicate things

<shawn> "In content implemented using markup languages that support the
following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs
[when users set] all of the following and by changing no other style
property:"

lc: initial thought... not complicate things

<shawn> brainstorm from andrew "Success Criterion 1.4.12 Text Spacing
(Level AA):" -> "Success Criterion 1.4.12 Text Spacing User Override (Level
AA):"

as: change stem to Text Spacing - User override

<shawn> current wording - "The intent of this Success Criterion (SC) is to
ensure that people can override text spacing to improve their reading
experience."

wd: "ensure that user can override the authors text spacing"

<scribe> *ACTION:* jim to update 1.4.12 understanding with wayne

<trackbot> Created ACTION-115 - Update 1.4.12 understanding with wayne [on
Jim Allan - due 2019-08-01].

<shawn> lc: is "handle" not normative?

<shawn> sh: Worth looking into possible change to "handle" - maybe not
totally smooth, yet maybe best approach given overall considerations.

ja: user functioning vs numbers. author proposes, user disposes - Al Gilman

wd: 2.5 acuity to font size, unless central vision damage, then goes to 3:1

as: acuity is highest contrast in clinical environment...best environment.

rssagent, make minutes

trackbot, end meeting
Summary of Action Items*[NEW]* *ACTION:* jim to update 1.4.12 understanding
with wayne

Summary of Resolutions

   1. leave current 1.4.12 SC test as "at least"
   <https://www.w3.org/2019/07/25-lvtf-minutes.html#resolution01>

[End of minutes]

-- 
Jim Allan, Accessibility Coordinator
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9452 http://www.tsbvi.edu/
"We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964