- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 15:17:07 -0500
- To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Hi all, On Tuesday's AG call Andrew kindly noted the main issues for the Adapting Text SC for in the minutes. 1. <AWK> "Applicability to mobile, Flash, Java, etc when user agents don't support." In in earlier versions we tried to add exemptions for things that don't support by adding language to the SC. However, that was rejected. Bruce said on the March 14 Survey: "The NOTE belongs to Accessibility Supported, and is harmful if left with with SC (because then it would be poking Accessibility Supported in the eye)." Steve has made a proposal with a subtle change using "WHEN a mechanism overrides" language. It places no requirement on that mechanism to even exist. Instead, authors need only be concerned with loss of content or functionality when the client makes changes. Steve's idea is Proposal D (4 April 2017) https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-291618718 2. <AWK> conformance being superficial (only one option) Having one option is not superficial. It does exactly what it needs to do. It addresses the ability to override. The author has to prove that each bullet can overridden. That is the test, plain and simple. 3. <Greg> "Ideally we would split this into two SC: Level A to work when author formatting is overridden, and Level AAA to provide its own mechanism to override the formatting." I had an idea for an in tandem 2 SC approach. It is Proposal E and F: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-291918379 As Steve said, I suspect we will find for Proposal F there simply isn't enough research for what a widget should require in fonts, color combinations, etc. But I have asked Jim if LVTF wants to tackle it. 4. <AWK> "Greg's point - perhaps this should be an SC to speak to non-interference where adaptability is used" That is what proposal E (as well as the others) is attempting to do. What we are missing is the understanding doc to add explanations. Ideas for improvement? Please respond on GitHub with your comments. https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78 Thanks everyone! Kindest Regards, Laura -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2017 20:17:43 UTC