Re: SC #78 'Adapting text', and a question regarding consensus on icon fonts

I think that it is a problem if we forbid any method/technique/technology that can be used in an accessible manner. So, while using icon fonts seems to be challenging to do well, it also seems possible to do well (see for problems and some solutions). If this resource is correct, we shouldn’t be doing anything to forbid icon fonts _done well_ but should be addressing the cases where the use of icon fonts causes problems.

Then we can have a failure that shows how to fail the SC by using icon fonts incorrectly, and techniques that show positive examples of how to pass the SC, but we don’t want to be in the situation of saying that “yes, what you are doing is accessible, but because most people don’t do that correctly we are banning the practice”.


Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility

On 4/20/17, 06:06, "Alastair Campbell" <> wrote:

>Detlev wrote:
>> So would this basically be a technique *for users* who would have to update any custom stylesheets they may be using by working in this exception for elements with role=img?
>Yes, but it has to work both ways, this would also be a sufficient technique for the new SC. I.e. if you use font icons that are problematic when fonts are replaced, then it musts be marked up appropriately.
>It would also need to be included as something in the testing text (understanding doc), and recommended for user-agent side solutions.
>>  I guess there is nothing authors can do to safely exempt icon fonts from any manipulation by user style sheets that fail to cater for icon fonts this way, correct?
>Correct, but if this is a known thing included in the techniques and understanding document, there is a viable solution.

Received on Thursday, 20 April 2017 14:07:20 UTC