- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 15:00:10 +0100
- To: "public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
On 04/07/2016 14:30, Adam Solomon wrote: > It is common in responsive design to provide different even limited > functionality for mobile users as David described. We should not > disallow such a design pattern under any circumstances. > Each view must be accessible. However, if a mobile user cannot access > the higher res view and instead is fed a limited mobile-oriented view > and that view is accessible then there is no discrimination against that > user, for all users in the mobile environment are given the same > accessible functionality. What happens if the reduced functionality mobile view is triggered because the user (e.g. on a desktop/laptop) has simply set their zoom to be high enough to comfortably read the site? I think there's some overlap here where it does fall within the realm of accessibility. > Consider a situation where a webmaster has two sites, one of which > provides more functionality, while the other less. No violation here. > Extending this logic to a situation where the server feeds content and > functionality based on user preferences, so too no violation. > When access to functionality is determined by client scripts (but not > because of lack of accessibility) so too there should be no violation of > wcag. > Webmasters have the right to determine what content is available to > users, unless the criterion for that decision inherently discriminates > against users who require accessible content. In the zoom scenario, that would be the case, arguably. 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 Monday, 4 July 2016 14:00:32 UTC