I can live with 400%. I don't know if WebAim can. https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/250 Cheers, David MacDonald *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* Tel: 613.235.4902 LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> twitter.com/davidmacd GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> * Adapting the web to all users* * Including those with disabilities* If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 5:38 AM, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote: > Thanks Alastair - Yes, at this point based on group input/past review let > us know David if you can't live with 400% or have some new information. > > Josh > > > Alastair Campbell wrote: > > David wrote: > > > I suggest we drop back to 300%. > > > > Hi David, > > > > There was quite a lot of evidence, rational and justification in the > issues review [1], could you provide some for that statement? > > > > The comments on the amount of resize/zoom (inside and out of the WG) > seemed to fall into two camps: They were either happy with 400%, or thought > anything over 150-200% was too difficult, so I’m not sure where 300% came > from? > > > > Cheers, > > > > -Alastair > > 1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Resize_ > content_issues_review > > > > > -- > Joshue O Connor > Director | InterAccess.ie >Received on Friday, 5 May 2017 11:53:00 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:13 UTC