Re: [UnDoc comment] Fwd: About 1.4.12 Text Spacing (AA)

Thanks Shawn. Added to GitHub.


Brent A. Bakken
Director, Accessibility Strategy & Education Services
Psychometrics & Testing Services
*Pearson*

512 202 1087
brent.bakken@pearson.com






On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 8:41 AM Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Norah, Brent, and UnDoc editors,
>
> Please see below about an issue with SC 1.4.12. Basically, there was a
> misunderstanding that the default text had to have that spacing.
>
> I would be good to make very clear in the Understanding Doc that is not
> the case -- that the SC is about users changing spacing.
>
> (I'm not sure whether or not Daniel had read the Understanding doc -- in
> any case, we want it to be clear. :)
>
> Thanks,
> ~Shawn
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: About 1.4.12 Text Spacing (AA)
> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 05:48:38 +0000
> From: ...
> To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
> CC: wai@w3.org <wai@w3.org>
>
> Hi Shawn,
>
> That makes perfect sense :-)
> Reading is key I guess ;-)
> Thanks for explaining.
>
> Daniel
>
>
> > On 18 Sep 2018, at 21:58, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Daniël,
> >
> > WCAG 2.1 Success Criterion 1.4.12 Text Spacing says: "... no loss of
> content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following..."
> >
> > The intent is for content to work when users *choose* to *override*
> default text spacing.
> > It is not intended that the spacing listed is the default spacing of the
> content that all people get.
> >
> > More information is in "Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.12: Text
> Spacing" at:
> >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.w3.org_WAI_WCAG21_Understanding_text-2Dspacing.html&d=DwIDaQ&c=0YLnzTkWOdJlub_y7qAx8Q&r=v-L6X-ScaY5UKb-F-_zcuXdbPw2UYK_gaTG8R5d9h7U&m=KbfjJZI_1Lcq1E5TfEj0yKSj1bSSht3ebTrhufRKfSs&s=SATNQTU_Y1QdSxkLTrbjCBNdFGHaacdO1QqeO8nlt4M&e=
> >
> > Does that make sense now?
> >
> > We will look at better explaining this in "Understanding Success
> Criterion 1.4.12: Text Spacing".
> >
> > Regards,
> > ~Shawn
> > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.w3.org_People_Shawn_&d=DwIDaQ&c=0YLnzTkWOdJlub_y7qAx8Q&r=v-L6X-ScaY5UKb-F-_zcuXdbPw2UYK_gaTG8R5d9h7U&m=KbfjJZI_1Lcq1E5TfEj0yKSj1bSSht3ebTrhufRKfSs&s=2_2SAc-KMqeG7OUs1f5ApKD-fet1RfQ1NKj7E1DRDqs&e=
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/17/2018 7:50 AM, ...wrote:
> >> Hi,
>
> >> We’ve been trying to implement WCAG2.1, but are having some problems
> with your 1.4.12 rules.
>
> >> We are trying to make our website as usable as possible for as many
> people possible, but the text-spacing is making this rather difficult. We
> use Noto-Sans and use a rather large font-size (16px on mobile, 18 on
> tablet-ish and 20 on desktop, as base font). We use Noto-Sans, because it
> has a high contrast and is very legible. However, applying a 0.12em
> letter-spacing and a 0.16em word-spacing makes our texts hard to read for
> those that do not suffer from dyslexia.
>
> >> Did you have a specific font in mind when you made this rule? Because
> some fonts are already dyslexia-friendly and these would suffer from this
> rule. So I think this rule might not meet its purpose and might have a
> negative effect: I think designers will change fonts to one that is by
> default very narrow, so the letter-spacing will just become a sort of
> “reset”. I even think font-makers will come up with new fonts to
> counter-effect this WCAG-rule.
>
> >> Then there is the line-height rule. I agree that this is absolutely
> necessary, on regular body text. But we have a header (h1) that have a 40px
> font-size (32px on mobile). A 1.5 line-height is unnecessarily high and
> will create problems when the title is over multiple lines (like on
> mobile). This rule will also cause designers to use less big fonts, causing
> actually more problems than you are trying to solve.
>
> >> May I suggest to exclude Headers (and labels and such) from this rule?
> And/or maybe change this rule, based on font-size (like you did with
> contrast).
>
> >> Also the “spacing following paragraphs” is decreasing a readers flow
> through a website. It creates a large gap, especially on websites with
> large fonts (who aim to help the visually impaired). Again your rules will
> work against you, causing designers to decrease the font to improve
> readability for the majority.
>
> >> Have you actually tested these properties on a real website (I noticed
> w3.org is still not complying with a lot of your own recommendations)?
> And do you test your suggestions with the right representation of real
> users?
>
> >> I mean, we can’t implement rules that make it noticeably harder for
> 60-70 % of our visitors.
>
> >> I hope you can find some clever solution to accommodate all users as
> opposed to just the group with disabilities.
>
> >> And yes, you can save my message publicly online ;-)
>
> >> /Sincerely,/
> ...
>
>