Re: CfC: Changes to Understanding 1.4.3

I am confused about the move to PX from PT

PT is defined in the literature as a particular size in real space.    (I know it is also used in virtual space in a variable manner — but it does have a real world size definition) 

is PX also defined as a real size?       It seems to me that it is highly dependent on pixels per inch — but perhaps PX has a defined size in the real world now just like PT did.
Does it? 

gregg

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 8:02 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
> Alastair,
> The changes that you are raising are not ready for a CfC yet as the group needs to see and discuss some proposed changes and then once we think that we have consensus we can do a CfC around it.
> 
> If we can approve changes of the sort that you suggest in the next month and a half then those changes will be in the next update of the Understanding document also, but we shouldn’t intertwine this issue with the current CfC.
> 
> Thanks,
> AWK
> 
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility and Standards
> Adobe 
> 
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> 
> From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>
> Date: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 04:52
> To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>
> Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Subject: Re: CfC: Changes to Understanding 1.4.3
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> I have one blocking comment:
> 
> Having just commented on the text-sizing thread, where the new version has:
> "approximately 19 pt and 24 pt font sizes”
> 
> I think it should px rather than pt? Otherwise that’s 25px and 32px!
> 
> You see how confusing the use of PT is? ;-)
> 
> With that change I think it is an improvement on the previous one and I’d support the update.
> 
> Based on the other thread I think there are two other small changes that could make a big improvement without normative changes:
> ------------
>  "18 point" and "bold" can both have different meanings in different fonts but, except for very thin or unusual fonts, they should be sufficient. Since there are so many different fonts, the general measures are used and a note regarding fancy or thin fonts is included. When displayed in a browser 1pt is defined as 1.33px, so 18pt is equivalent to 24px.
> -------------
> 
> Also, when we talk about text embedded within images, we should consider that images in HTML can vary in size (in a responsive site) so not only is the creation in an image editor unreliable, but the size of the image when displayed on the page will vary!
> ------------
> (delete the first bit of the paragraph). When creating images of large-scale text, authors should ensure that the text in the image is roughly equivalent to 1.2 and 1.5 em or to 120% or 150% of the default size for body text when shown in the browser. For example, an author would need to ensure that the text shown is approximately 19 px and 24 px when shown in the browser in order to successfully present images of large-scale text to a user.
> ——————
> 
> It should be fairly straightforward to compare image within an image to text outside of the image, so I don’t think it is adding any further hardship. It also prevents people creating high-res images with 30pt text that is actually displayed at 10px when on the page.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -Alastair
> 
> From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>
> Date: Monday, 25 April 2016 at 16:20
> To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Subject: Re: CfC: Changes to Understanding 1.4.3
> Resent-From: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Monday, 25 April 2016 at 16:21
> 
> I should have put in the link to the changes with the right “diff” view option set:
> 
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/177/files?diff=split <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/177/files?diff=split>
> 
> Hopefully this makes this easier…
> 
> AWK
> 
> From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>
> Date: Monday, April 25, 2016 at 10:58
> To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Subject: CfC: Changes to Understanding 1.4.3
> 
> CALL FOR CONSENSUS – ends Wednesday April 27 at 11:00am Boston time.
> 
> The WG discussed a pull request to provide specific changes to understanding 1.4.3 and agreed that the changes were acceptable.  This CfC is on the changes implemented in Understanding 1.4.3 as part of the implementation of Issue 157 (https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/157 <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/157>) which was agreed to in a previous CfC.
> 
> Please review the suggested changes here:
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/177/files <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/177/files>
> 
> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this position, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.
> 
> Thanks,
> AWK
> 
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility and Standards
> Adobe 
> 
> akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
> http://twitter.com/awkawk <http://twitter.com/awkawk>