W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2017

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

From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 15:11:58 +0100
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <84c45704-4c6b-afbf-8a02-7d53f4774250@splintered.co.uk>
On 20/04/2017 15:06, Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:
> 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
> https://www.filamentgroup.com/lab/bulletproof_icon_fonts.html 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.

There are techniques that can make icon fonts accessible to AT users, 
and to users that run with browsers that don't support font-face,  but 
no technique that makes them impervious to users changing their font 
settings (note that this scenario is not mentioned in the 
Filamentgroup's article).

> 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”.

It's clearly not accessible if we're trying to allow for users to also 
be able to arbitrarily change/override fonts though (which this SC does)

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, 20 April 2017 14:12:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:12 UTC