SC 1.4.10 reflow - was RE: Notes from call

Hi Bruce et al.,

It seems like what you are saying is that the page tab panel would need to reflow – but the list of page tabs could have page tabs that extend off the side of the screen and be acceptable.  That’s how I would interpret it.  Some folks then raise the question on whether there needs to be a visual cue that the other page tabs are off the edge of the screen – this goes for carousel type content as well. I’m not sure if the SC addresses the need for a visual cue or not.

In my poster image examples each poster and heading fits into < 320x256px block.  I assume if each block fits into less than 320x256px for carousel like controls or grids then that would also be acceptable.

Lastly, regarding the code block that is < 256 high but scrolls horizontally and is wide – it would be good to have some sort of decision one way or another – but I suspect that while this may not require two-dimensional scrolling to read that it poses significant challenge and if you take the whole page into account could fail if the whole page scrolls vertically.  That is – this, hangs on how we interpret vertically scrolling content – whether that applies to the page or the block of text.

This last situation may also be seen on iPad apps where there is no vertical scrolling but that the block is short < 256px – but wider than 320px.  Since the iPad view in the case, I describe has no scrolling – it’s unclear how to interpret this.  That is – when there is no scrolling – how should this be applied?

Jonathan

From: Bruce Bailey <Bailey@Access-Board.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2024 9:02 AM
To: WCAG 2.x issues list <public-wcag2-issues@w3.org>
Cc: Jon Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
Subject: RE: Notes from call

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Thanks Jon.

I think there is consensus about page tab content needing reflow, and allowing that tabs may be off the screen in that size view port.

We also have consensus that carousel-like content might not be a control.  Your example of things like video posters from a streaming service are in that category.

With your example, does each poster need to fit 320 by 240 to pass?

Same question, what about each grid item of your web store example (i.e., multiple columns and rows)?

The non-wrapping code block is a good example illustrating that the exception is tricky.  HTML can word wrap easily enough, but many programing languages lack that flexibility.

Again, thanks for the examples and your feedback!


From: Jon Avila
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 6:01 PM
To: WCAG 2.x issues list <public-wcag2-issues@w3.org<mailto:public-wcag2-issues@w3.org>>
Subject: RE: Notes from call

Other situations related to reflow include that I think could pass:

  *   Page tabs (where some tabs may be off the screen in that size view port) but that individually fit within the view.
  *   Horizontal scrolling controls like carousels but that may not be carousels – things like video posters in a streaming service
  *   Grids that are not data tables – e.g. itunes store songs in multiple columns and rows where each item fits into the view without requiring scrolling an individual item

What is the consensus then on short blocks of horizontally scrolling text that are shorter than 256pixels – would these fail because you have to scroll horizontally even though you only have to scroll in one direction to read the text – but the page as a whole is vertically scrolling?  An example here might be a non-wrapping code block that is shorter than 256px.  Materially the horizontally scrolling content is difficult to track for some users.

Jonathan