I THINK this was a typo. Why would you want to require that authors do something that can be more easily done by users. I think it was meant to be “usable WITH a reduced field of vision.” I may be wrong but that is something that SHOULD be there and isnt — and the other makes little sense as far as I can see. (For authors to try to do) Usable zoomed to 200 % would do that — or moving a mask around the screen. gregg > On Jun 27, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote: > > The Access Board chose to put a requirement in that says "reduces the field of vision" -- while this is a functional requirement that may only be called into play when something can't be made accessible or a technical standard doesn't exist -- it raises a good point that low vision users must deal with. Whether it's limited field of vision due to a visual condition or because of notification/changes that happen outside of the field or content that must be compared such as table headers and a data cell become more difficult and is something that I believe the LV TF will be looking into.
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2016 01:42:33 UTC