- From: Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:10:24 +0200
- To: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
- Cc: "GLWAI Guidelines WG org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi Gregg, On 26 Apr 2016, at 2:42, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: > Notes are NOT normative. > You are correct > > but in definitions… hmmmm.. > > pts are defined in inches — so they are an absolute number. They are not in CSS. In CSS they are defined in px (1pt = 1.333px). There is no way for an author to ensure that an element or a specific font is a specific physical size. See my tests here: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/181#issuecomment-214661286 Best, Eric > > pixels are not — or do you have some absolute definition of px > meaning a fraction of an inch (or mm)? > > gregg > >> On Apr 25, 2016, at 5:34 PM, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com> >> wrote: >> >> Gregg, >> Are the Notes normative too? I seem to recall that Notes are not >> normative in W3C specs and as such we could add a note (to accompany >> the 5 other notes) following the definition of large scale (text) to >> clarify what 14pt and 18pt are equivalent to in px. >> >> This is important to solve. I had to answer this question twice this >> week from developers who couldn't understand why the contrast checker >> was returning an error for text that they thought was "large" (but >> was actually only 14px bold and hence was not large) >> >> Regards, >> James >> >> On 4/25/2016 3:24 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: >>> I’m not sure what you are referring to by "Changing definition of >>> "Large text" to use px rather than pt" >>> >>> Definitions in WCAG are normative. They cannot be changed without >>> changing the standard. >>> >>> We can provide an advisory - but we can’t change the definition. >>> >>> If we are defining it differently in an extension - then that too >>> seems to are problematical >>> >>> If we are creating a NEW version of WCAG - the we could change it >>> — but there will be some confusion. >>> >>> Why is it needed? >>> >>> >>> gregg >>> >>>> On Apr 25, 2016, at 4:54 PM, Patrick H. Lauke >>>> <redux@splintered.co.uk <mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 25/04/2016 22:41, ALAN SMITH wrote: >>>>> Just a quick thought. >>>>> >>>>> I know many companies are designing for responsive design with >>>>> break >>>>> points - as they call them - for several specific device screen >>>>> sizes. >>>> >>>> Clarification: screen sizes defined in CSS units (mostly pixels and >>>> ems), not physical dimensions (as there is no way to write a media >>>> query breakpoint in physical sizes). Which loops us right back to >>>> the start of the whole discussion. >>>> >>>>> Would there be any value in mentioning some common screen sizes in >>>>> any >>>>> technical write up for this? >>>> >>>> If you were thinking along the lines of "typical sizes are X, Y, Z, >>>> and for those sizes your best font sizes are A, B, C" then there's >>>> possibly little value here, as the typical screen sizes bear no >>>> relation to the actual physical dimensions of screens, so again >>>> you'd be back at square one and not actually defining anything >>>> substantial, unfortunately. >>>> >>>> I think the one universal piece of advice when it comes to font >>>> sizing would be (from a readability point of view): don't make your >>>> base font size smaller than 1rem / the default UA base font size, >>>> and ensure that your viewport (for mobile/tablet devices) is set to >>>> the device/UA's ideal viewport (using width=device-width), as that >>>> should guarantee a font size that the device manufacturer/UA >>>> developer deems to be readable. >>>> >>>> P >>>> -- >>>> Patrick H. Lauke >>>> >>>> www.splintered.co.uk <http://www.splintered.co.uk/> | >>>> https://github.com/patrickhlauke <https://github.com/patrickhlauke> >>>> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ <http://flickr.com/photos/redux/> | >>>> http://redux.deviantart.com <http://redux.deviantart.com/> >>>> twitter: @patrick\_h\_lauke | skype: patrick\_h\_lauke >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Regards, James >> <oracle\_sig\_logo.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/> >> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility >> Phone: +1 650 506 6781 <tel:+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415 >> 987 1918 <tel:+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video: >> <sip:james.nurthen@oracle.com>james.nurthen@oracle.com >> <mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com> >> Oracle Corporate Architecture >> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood Cty, 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 >> -- Eric Eggert Web Accessibility Specialist Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2016 08:10:38 UTC