RE: 30 Jan 2007 Team B Meeting

I would say 

"twice the height and width"    

 


Gregg
 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 

 

 


  _____  


From: public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bailey, Bruce
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 9:24 AM
To: public-wcag-teamb@w3.org
Cc: TeamB
Subject: RE: 30 Jan 2007 Team B Meeting

I would guess that 2x would have translation challenges.  Is "twice the
relative size" clear?  It was not obvious to me that we had solved the
conundrum of (twice the point size) versus (twice the area) versus (twice
both vertical and horrizontal measurements).  I was left with impression
that someone thought they had a handle on this.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Loretta Guarino Reid [mailto:lorettaguarino@google.com] 
Sent: Wed 1/31/2007 9:47 AM 
To: Bailey, Bruce 
Cc: Makoto Ueki; TeamB 
Subject: Re: 30 Jan 2007 Team B Meeting

Thanks, Bruce. I thought that older screen magnifiers started at 2X, 
and it is good to have confirmation of that. I think we might add that 
to the rationale for why 200%. 

Also, do you think we should be using 2X rather than 200% in the 
success criteria? Will that we clearer? Can you suggest phrasing? 

Loretta