Re: Discussion - Add Orientation SC to Editor's Draft

I'm certainly willing to yield to consensus, but I also like to keep all of
our SCs as simple and readable as possible.  I'm struggling to see how "or
by user request" adds value to this SC.

We don't have that on other SCs - for example Contrast Minimum.  We had
some discussions on a recent AGWG call regarding users that desire /
require contrast levels that don't meet the 4.5:1 (or even 3:1)
requirements.  They may use their own stylesheets to achieve their desired
text / background colors, but 1.4.5 does not specifically call out "not
overriding" that user preference.  It's a given.

I think it would be the same situation here.  This SC is simply instructing
authors not to force portrait or landscape mode on users.  If a user
decides to lock their orientation via device hardware, OS setting, or even
a setting provided by the app itself - that's fine.  That's the user's
choice.  The original SC text would apply:  "don't force portrait or
landscape on the user".

At it's simplest form this SC is saying respect the user's preference
regarding display orientation - regardless of how they arrive there.

-marc


On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Moving this out of the CFC - to a separate thread for further discussion.
>
> Thanks for that Steve.  We can of course iterate this SC.
>
> I like the second amendment with the edit:
>
> “Content is not locked to a specific display orientation, and
> functionality of the content is operable in all display orientations,
> except where a specific display orientation is essential for use of the
> content or by user request.”
>
> Thanks
> --
> Joshue O Connor
> Director | InterAccess.ie
>