- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:35:11 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 16/06/2016 21:19, Wayne Dick wrote: > One thing that is being discussed in the LVTF and the Cognitive Task > Force is the notion of customization. That is, reconfiguration of the > author's presentation. Regarding the reconfiguration of visual to audio, > WCAG 2 was very clear and clean. This was not the case for visual > presentation to new visual presentation. The above context is needed to > address heading presentation. > > Size is a poor discriminant in the large print world. Must people with > reduced visual acuity (a large LV group) need far more than 200% > enlargement. 400-900% is more like it. Now if headings are bigger, there > isn't any screen space left. The need for customization is demonstrated > here. If one can see color, color is a good discriminator. If not a > prefix like . For H1, .. For H2, ... For H3, ... . For H4 etc is > useful. Depending on the individual's functional vision differences > presentations could be implemented differently. > > This is an example of differences that could be implemented in HTML / > CSS with proper structure. > > Given the enormous flexibility of HTML / CSS and Javascript, and the > remarkable rendering power of all major browsers, it is surprising how > little of this capability has be applied to the needs of people who need > re-configurable visual presentation. > > Regarding the semantic implication of headings: Yes navigation would be > great for non screen reader users. For WCAG 2.1 we need to focus on > content, not what UAs can do. The idea of customisation sound to me like the spirit of what guideline 1.3 Adaptable *wants* to do https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#content-structure-separation "Create content that can be presented in different ways". Taking the example of headings, once a heading (and its level) can be *programmatically* determined (which satisfies 1.3.1), a UA can easily provide customisable styles for those headings - the way in which these styles are targetted obviously then needs to include more than just naive "if it's h1 - h6, apply these styles", but more deeply hook into "if this element has a native or assigned role of heading, apply these styles based on the level". Perhaps the understanding/techniques for 1.3.1 need to be expanded to emphasise this particular aspect further, in light of low-vision and cognitive? It still feels like authors should, nonetheless, take care that the out-of-the-box visual presentation they choose also makes heading hierarchy clear, and that this should also be a new SC. And, as James Nurthen quite rightly suggests, this is not necessarily a matter of picking a size, but can take many forms - i.e. there are many ways (possibly quite subjective to audit?) to visually distinguish what's a heading, and what different levels of headings are. This, to me, would fall under the general "Principle 3: Understandable - Information and the operation of user interface must be understandable." P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2016 20:35:37 UTC