Re: EOWG: ACTIONS for all this week [was: Preliminary Evaluation text resize, page zoom, window resize]

Hi Wayne,

While the criteria do not talk about browser enabled page zoom it is still
a method that is used to resize content, and while it should simply scale
up content it is in reality vulnerable to the same issues that text
resizing has. It is easy to build a page which causes content to disappear
off the edges of the windown without the browsers adding scrollbars to
extend to bring them in to view for example.

Criteria that don't include this are in my view are incomplete criteria,
and the absense of criteria for page zoom does not invalidate this test as
far as accessibility concerns go.

It is also not a case that only 100% and 200% should be test. Although the
current tests don't mention it it is also possible to have designs which
make content inaccessible at 150% but which are corrected at 200%.

The purpose of adding to these sections at this time is to determine what
goes in and what to leave out. While the SC are a useful guide it shouldn't
be a limiting factor to what is considered a legitmate test. It's my view
that we can easily treat page zoom, text resize (and to a lesser extent
window resizing) with a set of tests that are easy to perform together and
require little overhead to combine.

Thanks,

Ian.


On 31 January 2013 15:20, Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't have time to comment on everything, but this might help:
>
> The text enlargement criteria is not about screen magnification.  If
> you don't have a browser that enables text enlargement (aka. Text Only
> Zoom) you cannot test the criteria.  Also, if your browser does not
> enable the 200% enlargement, it cannot test the criteria.
>
> So this should read: Use a browser that provides text only enlargement
> to a size of at least 200%.  In most such browsers, (ctl+=) enlarges
> text on PCs and (cmd+=) enlarges text on the Mac. Apply the enlarge
> text command about 4 to 5 times.  If columns overflow,  lines bleed
> into each other or any text overwrites other text the page fails the
> criterion. You do not have to worry about greater enlargement.  Users
> who need enlargement greater than 200% are not covered by this
> criteria.
>
>
>
> On 1/30/13, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> wrote:
> > Thanks, Ian.
> >
> > All active EOWG folks:
> >
> > First, please review the Criteria for checks to include at:
> > <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_Analysis#Criteria_for_checks>
> >
> > The two sections Ian pointed to we were not sure whether or not to
> include.
> > Please add your comments (under the EOWG Notes heading) on reasons to
> > include them and reasons not to include them. (Don't spend time polishing
> > the drafts of those sections until/if we decide that we are indeed going
> to
> > include them.)
> > *
> > <
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Web_Accessibility_Preliminary_Evaluation#Check_zoom_and_text_enlarge
> >
> > *
> > <
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Web_Accessibility_Preliminary_Evaluation#Check_page_resize
> >
> > (before I saw that Ian sent this e-mail, I updated the section headings,
> > which changed the URIs -- sorry 'bout that.)
> >
> > Then, please review the other sections listed on the EOWG home page under
> > Actions for All EOWG at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/#actionsall>
> >
> > Note that there are some @@s in these sections:
> > * some point out new sentences for your careful review
> > * some are easy things someone can add, e.g., keyboard shortcuts for FF
> > toolbar
> > * some are open issues - please be prepared to discuss these
> >
> > Thanks much!
> >
> > ~Shawn
> >
> >
> > On 1/30/2013 1:13 PM, Ian Pouncey wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> I've updated the content at
> >>
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Web_Accessibility_Preliminary_Evaluation#Check_zoom.2C_enlarge
> >> and
> >>
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Web_Accessibility_Preliminary_Evaluation#Page_resize
> >>
> >> Please take a look and give feedback before or at the next EO call.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Ian.
> >
> >
>