RE: Issues with Target Size SC

Thanks, Josh.  Yes, that’s a sufficient summary.  My objection is really to the negative margin technique for increasing target size.  I think we just need to acknowledge that it has significant issues which have not been solved, and thus cannot be used to meet either the AA or AAA version.  For links within blocks of text, this means requiring a 44px font size at AAA.  I’d withdraw my objection if we fully withdraw such a technique.

With regard to the user agent control exception, I did not really object since my concern is really about clarity in the language and not the concept itself.  The exception now simply says:

“User agent control: The appearance of the target is determined by the user agent and is not modified by the author.”

I think the scope here ought to be narrowed to the author modifying size and not just to any modification.  The LVTF was careful to do this in the similar exception we put into UI component contrast (i.e. only changes to color disengage the exception).

Steve

From: Joshue O Connor [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie]
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 11:51 AM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Issues with Target Size SC

Hi all,

Recently we had a CFC for Target Size
Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCreview_May_17/#wbsq4/results

Call minutes: https://www.w3.org/2017/05/23-ag-minutes.html#item04


The new SC can be reviewed here, in the context of the full draft:
https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/target-size_ISSUE-60/guidelines/#target-size

https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/target-size_ISSUE-60/guidelines/#target-size-no-exception<https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/target-size_ISSUE-60/guidelines/#target-size-all>

We initially passed this CFC but there was an objection from Stephen Repsher
that I'd like us to address, as well as other substantive comments from GreggV.

The chairs have decided to remove this SC from the editors draft while we address these
comments, so I'm starting this thread to do that.

Steve, you made some comments:

>I cannot live with the AAA version, or any version which plans to document a CSS hack as a viable technique for increasing target size (see #1).  >The little testing it has undergone has turned up several issues, namely focus highlights and overlap, Which have the potential to end up >creating significant inaccessibility.  However, if the technique is to use a 44 pixel line, then I’ll support it.

You also mentioned/wanted clarification on:


Can I assume that the CSS padding & negative margin technique<http://codepen.io/patrickhlauke/pen/aBNREe> that had been proposed to meet this SC for links within blocks of text is being abandoned? [...]
Yes, targets in blocks of text are excluded from the requirements
[Steve] I’ll accept that “yes” for AA, but there is no such exception for AAA for which we still need to provide techniques.

And there was a question about what constitutes a 'change' regarding the exception for user agent control.

Apologies if I have not captured the gist of your thinking. Does this cover your concerns?

Thanks
--
Joshue O Connor
Director | InterAccess.ie