Re: Comments on proposed new SC 2.5.3

I also updated the understanding...

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 9:22 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> I tweaked it a bit to not rely on brackets, which are not in Success
> Criteria.
>
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_revision_of_2.5.3#Proposed_2.5.3
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:52 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> I've updated the WIKI incorporating Patricks tweaks.
>>
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_revision_of_2.5.3#Proposed_2.5.3
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:44 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> >This would probably take it quite a few steps back in the discussion,
>>>
>>> I think you are taking the discussion forward, incorporating most of
>>> the proposed language and addressing your concerns with amendments. We have
>>> struggled with the short catch handle. This one is descriptive, a little
>>> longer than I'd like (10 syllables vs 6), but maybe OK. The bullet points
>>> are basically the same with a good qualifier on 1st bullet to avoid the
>>> "click" confusion. and a tweak on bullet 2. I'll put it in the WIKI.
>>>
>>> 2.5.3 Avoid accidental activation: for single touch and/or pointer
>>> activation, at least one of the following is true:
>>>
>>> - activation is on the "up" event (either explicitly, or using the
>>> platform's generic activation/click event)
>>> - a mechanism is available to allow the user to define which action
>>> (e.g. "down" or "up" event") triggers activation
>>> - confirmation is provided, which can dismiss activation
>>> - activation is reversible
>>> - exception: when timing of activation is essential and waiting for the
>>> up-event would invalidate the activity
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <
>>> redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19/04/2016 20:56, David MacDonald wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If that's the way it reads, that is not the intention. Here is the
>>>>> pseudo language.
>>>>>
>>>>> When stuff can be done with event up then one of following is true
>>>>>
>>>>>   * do the thing that can be done (use event up)
>>>>>   * otherwise have fallbacks (2 bullets points)
>>>>>   * other wise it shouldn't be done because its a spacegun, or piano
>>>>>     etc.......
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a suggestion to improve the language ...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This would probably take it quite a few steps back in the discussion,
>>>> but something more along the lines of:
>>>>
>>>> 2.5.3 Avoid accidental activation: for single touch and/or pointer
>>>> activation, at least one of the following is true:
>>>>
>>>> - activation is on the "up" event (either explicitly, or using the
>>>> platform's generic activation/click event)
>>>> - a mechanism is available to allow the user to define which action
>>>> (e.g. "down" or "up" event") triggers activation
>>>> - confirmation is provided, which can dismiss activation
>>>> - activation is reversible
>>>> - exception: when timing of activation is essential and waiting for the
>>>> up-event would invalidate the activity
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> P
>>>> --
>>>> Patrick H. Lauke
>>>>
>>>> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
>>>> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
>>>> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>