- From: Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 07:58:07 -0700
- To: "Hoffman, Allen" <allen.hoffman@hq.dhs.gov>
- CC: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <523084FF.8020208@oracle.com>
Al, The issue here isn't about violating 2.3.1 Three Flashes or Below Threshold <http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/#seizure-does-not-violate> and triggering seizures. It is about violating 2.2.2: Pause, Stop, Hide <http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/#time-limits-pause>and being too distracting for people with cognitive impairments (screen reader issues with flashing content causing Off-Screen Model refreshes shouldn't apply to DOS, Linux, and Solaris text-based screen readers). Peter On 9/11/2013 7:33 AM, Hoffman, Allen wrote: > > Most terminal emulators have settings that do allow customization of > caret for blink rate, size, color, etc.Such would be great "sufficient > techniques", but I still think the size is the critical factor which > would not trigger seizures. > > *From:*Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 11, 2013 10:31 AM > *To:* Peter Korn > *Cc:* public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org > *Subject:* Re: A question has come up about SC 2.2.2 & the blinking > caret/cursor... > > Exactly. > > That is why the ability to personalize is so important. That is one > more example of the fact that "one size fits all" doesn't work - even > for a single disability - much less for everyone. > > /Gregg/ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > On Sep 11, 2013, at 10:06 AM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com > <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>> wrote: > > > > Gregg, > > Your thoughts are very similar to mine. The key, I think, is having a > configuration setting to turn off caret/cursor blinking. Note: doing > so may make it more difficult to locate the focus (e.g. when focus is > indicated in an edit-text field solely by the presence of a blinking > insertion point). But 2.4.7 Focus Visible > <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#navigation-mechanisms-focus-visible> > says: "...has a mode of operation where the keyboard focus indicator > is visible". This shows the brilliance of the folks developing WCAG. > > There is no requirement in WCAG that states that you must BOTH have no > blinking AND at the same time make the focus visible. Mind you, > various accessibility regulatory efforts push for addressing multiple > disabilities at the same time in ways that might be difficult to > satisfy. But then, we know already that solutions for some users some > cognitive disabilities can actually make things worse for other users > with other, different cognitive disabilities... > > > Regards, > > Peter > > On 9/11/2013 5:57 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: > > [The comments below are my opinion - and not official findings of > WCAG WG. Gregg Van - _ex_ co-chair of WCAG WG] > > The caret would never be a problem with 2.3.1. since a) it would > have to blink more than 3 times in any one second period (which I > have never seen) or else it automatically passes and b) it would > have to occupy more than 40% of the area subtended by the eye (10 > degrees) -- as normally displayed on a 1024 x 768 15 inch > screen. (See definition in WCAG 2.0). So you are correct > Peter - a blinking text caret/cursor would never fail 2.3.1 with > any caret that I have ever seen or could imagine -- even if you > did create one that blinked more than 3 times a second (which > would drive me to distraction). > > However -- one of the reason for the provision, is that blinking > content can be a distraction for some people that prevents them > from focusing. And small blinking objects can do this as well as > large. In fact the reason the cursor blinks is specifically so > that it will catch your eye. > > The normal way to solve this is to provide a way for the cursor > to be made to not blink. A non-blinking cursor option. > > NOTE: if the blinking cursor is part of the browser (and not > actually something created, and blinked, by the web page content) > then it is up to the browser not the web page to provide the > non-blinking option. > > For software it is a bit different I think. If the system cursor > blinks, and it is known that there is no option to turn it off, > the preferences/settings of the application could provide such an > option. Clearly however, the place that this should be fixed is > by providing a non-blinking cursor option in the system control > panel -- where other cursor options are provided. > > In the case you cite (the terminal window) it is not clear what > kind of terminal you mean - or whether this is a (terminal) > application generated cursor or a system cursor. But the above > would apply. > > And finally, yes - I think that something to this effect should be > in understanding doc -- at least for web pages. Not sure we can > say much about software in the Understanding WCAG 2.0 -- but > something like about the OS could be. > > Maybe something like > > "Note: a blinking text caret/cursor is specifically designed to > catch the attention of the user, and would fall under this > provision. However, if the caret/cursor is not generated by the > content, but if it is a system or browser generated cursor, it is > the browser or system that should provide the option to turn it > off so that it does not blink for the user on all pages (or > applications). " > > Gregg Van > > *From:*Peter Korn [mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com > <http://oracle.com/>] > *Sent:*Tuesday, September 10, 2013 10:18 PM > *To:*public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org> > *Subject:*A question has come up about SC 2.2.2 & the blinking > caret/cursor... > > Hi gang, > > As we are digesting WCAG2ICT's guidance internally at Oracle, > a question came up about whether and howSC 2.2.2: Pause, Stop, > Hide <http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/#time-limits-pause>should > be applied to the blinking text caret/cursor in a terminal > window (or the actual machine console). > > We presume that the blinking text caret/cursor is too small a > blinking/flashing region to trigger2.3.1 Three Flashes or > Below Threshold > <http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/#seizure-does-not-violate>, but > that is addressing a different concern. > > > Should a blinking text caret/cursor be a violation of 2.2.2? > Or is what is blinking not "information"? Or is the blinking > "essential"? Or is perhaps the blinking area small enough > that it doesn't serve as a significant distraction (since it's > not a problem on a console for a console screen reader or > magnifier), that we might appropriately add language to > Understanding to essentially exempt that behavior? > > > Regards, > > Peter > > -- > <image001.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/> > Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal > Phone:+1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522> > 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 > <image002.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>Oracle is > committed to developing practices and products that help > protect the environment > > -- > <oracle_sig_logo.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/> > Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal > Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522> > 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 > <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle > is committed to developing practices and products that help protect > the environment > -- Oracle <http://www.oracle.com> Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 14:58:55 UTC