Re: Length of line

David wrote:

> No browser that I know would do this:
>
> "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their establish-
> ment party for now and forever"

Erm... https://www.w3.org/TR/css-text/#hyphens-property
and http://caniuse.com/#search=hyphens
(which suggests support in most browsers with the exception of Android's
native browser)

JF

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:52 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> Perhaps I'm missing something. For example say there is the line
>
> "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their
> establishment party for now and forever"
>
> And lets say that at the end of the word "their" we have a count of 45
> characters (I didn't count). The browser window is narrowed to 50
> characters. Then the line will wrap after "their" and it would pass.
>
> "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their  (45
> characters)
> establishment party for now and forever ..."
>
> This would pass because there are 50 or less characters on that line.
>
> No browser that I know would do this:
>
> "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their establish-
> ment party for now and forever"
>
> In other words.... most lines will be less than 50 characters if 50 is the
> threshold we decide on.
>
> We have an established precedent in 1.4.8 of using characters to measure
> line length. I think in a dot release we should stick with that, unless I'm
> missing something.
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902 <(613)%20235-4902>
>
> 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 Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/01/2017 14:12, David MacDonald wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Shwetank
>>>
>>> Can you help us understand how hyphenation works in those languages? In
>>> English and French, (the languages I speak), the web the page just wraps
>>> the entire word if it doesn't fit. So there is not generally hyphenation
>>> for web writing.
>>>
>>
>> Regardless of language, hyphenation will be up to the browser to do
>> (support isn't fantastic / cross-browser just yet), or would require
>> additional JS solutions that forcibly break and hyphenate words (which
>> would likely lead to issues where AT would start to read word fragments
>> rather than full words). So there are potential technical limitations to
>> overcome here as well.
>>
>> P
>>
>> Cheers,
>>> David MacDonald
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>>>
>>> Tel:  613.235.4902
>>>
>>> LinkedIn
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>>>
>>> twitter.com/davidmacd <http://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 Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Shwetank Dixit
>>> <shwetank@barrierbreak.com <mailto:shwetank@barrierbreak.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     FWIW, I agree with John that character length is not a good criteria
>>>     at all for this purpose, especially from the viewpoint of
>>>     non-english languages. I believe the research and guidelines
>>>     mentioned in this discussion have not included languages from
>>>     scripts apart from the Latin script (please correct me if I’m wrong)
>>>     like Devnagari, Gurkumikhi, or any from the CJK ones for example.
>>>
>>>     I am especially concerned about the possibility of significantly
>>>     increased ‘hyphenation’ that this could result in (which John also
>>>     mentioned) causing bigger problems from a cognitive perspective.
>>>     —
>>>     Shwetank
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Wednesday, Jan 11, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Michael Pluke
>>>>     <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com
>>>>     <mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     I can see that the choice of characters as the unit of measurement
>>>>     can result in very different end-results that you get depending on
>>>>     the chosen font-size and font-face. This may make this unit less
>>>>     useful from an LV perspective. ____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     However I still think that, from a cognitive perspective, it is
>>>>     relevant and important to set a maximum line length in characters.
>>>>     Long lines with many words/characters are demonstrably hard to
>>>>     read for everyone but, most particularly for people with
>>>>     dyslexia.  The 80 characters in SC 1.4.8
>>>>     <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-con
>>>> trast-visual-presentation.html>
>>>>     will cause significant difficulties for many people with
>>>> dyslexia.____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     EA has quoted several research-based sources that offer realistic
>>>>     line-length proposals. From reading the extract from 'Dyslexia in
>>>>     the Digital Age' that EA linked-to (http://tinyurl.com/jra7hk3) I
>>>>     don’t think that it gives very strong evidence that 55 characters
>>>>     is the only choice. I’m a great fan of the realistic proposals
>>>>     that Luz Rello makes (based on her research
>>>>     (http://www.luzrello.com/Publications_files/uais2015.pdf
>>>>     <http://www.luzrello.com/Publications_files/uais2015.pdf>)) so I
>>>>     have confidence for specifying line lengths in the 44-66 range
>>>>     (although it was non-dyslexic people who benefitted most from 44
>>>>     character columns). The British Dyslexia Style Guide
>>>>     http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/common/ckeditor/filemanager/us
>>>> erfiles/About_Us/policies/Dyslexia_Style_Guide.pdf
>>>>     <http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/common/ckeditor/filemanager/u
>>>> serfiles/About_Us/policies/Dyslexia_Style_Guide.pdf>
>>>>     recommends that “Lines should not be too long: 60 to70
>>>>     characters.”____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     *Conclusion*: Based on all of the above I think that:____
>>>>
>>>>       * To benefit LV users we should avoid having SCs that give a
>>>>         line length based on the number of characters;____
>>>>       * To benefit people with dyslexia (and also the general
>>>>         population) the 1.4.8-based 80 character maximum in
>>>>         proposal #51 <https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/51> should
>>>>         be reduced to a figure no greater than 70 characters (and
>>>>         probably no less than 60).____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     Mike____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     *From:*John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com
>>>>     <mailto:john.foliot@deque.com>]
>>>>     *Sent:* 10 January 2017 23:56
>>>>     *To:* David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca
>>>>     <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>>
>>>>     *Cc:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
>>>>     *Subject:* Re: Length of line____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     TL;DR - Using 'character' as a unit of measurement is extremely
>>>>     problematic, and I do not support it's use here. ____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     **************____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     Some thoughts after today's call.____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     I personally have significant concerns over prescribing a fixed
>>>>     number of characters, especially such a low number, as a unit of
>>>>     measurement. ____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     *Internationalization:*____
>>>>
>>>>     When we factor in both Internationalization and languages other
>>>>     than English, we will quickly arrive at a point where the number
>>>>     25 is smaller than numerous words in different languages
>>>>     (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_words
>>>>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_words>), which will then
>>>>     require word hyphenization (most probably supplied by the content
>>>>     author, until such time as AI can do that job seamlessly). This
>>>>     then suggests to me that we will start to see 'forced' line-breaks
>>>>     again (using the presentational <br>), which could have a
>>>>     significant impact on screen flow in RWD (Responsive) layouts
>>>>     (i.e. the cure being worse the the symptom).____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     *Font-size and font-face choices:*____
>>>>
>>>>     Equally, as mentioned on the call, another factor in measuring
>>>>     this, related to horizontal scrolling, is font-size. For those of
>>>>     you using HTML-rich mail clients, and using a 25 character-count
>>>>     example taken from
>>>>     http://www.litscape.com/words/length/25_letters/25_letter_wo
>>>> rds.html
>>>>     <http://www.litscape.com/words/length/25_letters/25_letter_w
>>>> ords.html>:____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>         ​​____
>>>>
>>>>         electroencephalographical____
>>>>
>>>>         ​      ____
>>>>
>>>>         (Gmail's____
>>>>
>>>>         ​ ____
>>>>
>>>>         '____
>>>>
>>>>         ​____
>>>>
>>>>         S____
>>>>
>>>>         mall' sizing)​____
>>>>
>>>>         ​____
>>>>
>>>>         electroencephalographical      (Gmail's____
>>>>
>>>>         ​ ____
>>>>
>>>>         'Normal' sizing)​____
>>>>
>>>>         ​____
>>>>
>>>>         electroencephalographical      (Gmail's____
>>>>
>>>>         ​ ____
>>>>
>>>>         'Large' sizing)​____
>>>>
>>>>         ​____
>>>>
>>>>         electroencephalographical      (Gmail's____
>>>>
>>>>         ​ ____
>>>>
>>>>         'Huge' sizing)​____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     Q: How do we test for "success" here? Even the final line above
>>>>     (Gmail's "Huge" font-size) could introduce horizontal scrolling at
>>>>     some level of magnification on some devices, yet at 25 characters
>>>>     "meets" the current wording of the proposed SC.  ____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     Additionally, different font-faces will have different font-width
>>>>     characteristics, depending on the font-face chosen. For example:____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>         ​____
>>>>
>>>>         electroencephalographical      (Gmail 'sans-serif', size
>>>>         'normal')____
>>>>
>>>>         ​____
>>>>
>>>>         electroencephalographical    (Gmail 'Verdana', size 'normal')
>>>> ____
>>>>
>>>>         ​____
>>>>
>>>>         electroencephalographical     (Gmail 'Wide', size 'normal')____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     ...once again, depending on the font-face choice we have 3
>>>>     different line-lengths, and so I question the overall choice of
>>>>     "character" as a unit of measurement here.____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     *How to 'Succeed'/Author push-back:*____
>>>>
>>>>     The current proposed language for this SC reads:____
>>>>
>>>>         For the visual presentation of all text, a mechanism is
>>>>         available such that line length is user adjustable, to 25
>>>>         characters, with no two-dimensional scrolling required, and
>>>>         with the following exceptions.____
>>>>
>>>>         __ __
>>>>
>>>>     However, it is unclear what a page author can or should do to meet
>>>>     this requirement____
>>>>
>>>>     ​, as it very much feels like a User-Agent requirement as much as
>>>>     anything else. For SC 1.4.8, one technique is ____
>>>>
>>>>     G204
>>>>     <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2016/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20160105/G204>:
>>>>     /Not interfering with the user agent's reflow of text as the
>>>>     viewing window is narrowed/____
>>>>
>>>>     /​, /which​ seems to me to at least address the larger issue
>>>>     (avoid horizontal scrolling) without prescribing a specific
>>>>     line-length.____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     Finally, the current Success Criteria that requires an 80
>>>>     character line-length (____
>>>>
>>>>     SC 1.4.8
>>>>     <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-con
>>>> trast-visual-presentation.html>)
>>>>     is a AAA Success Criteria requirement, and yet this new proposed
>>>>     SC is at level A, at roughly 1/3 the 80-char limit. ____
>>>>
>>>>     ​Sadly (but not totally unreasonably) ​____
>>>>
>>>>     I suspect that we will get significant push-back at level A____
>>>>
>>>>     ​.____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     JF​____
>>>>
>>>>      ____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:31 PM, David MacDonald
>>>>     <david100@sympatico.ca <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>> wrote:____
>>>>
>>>>         I'm the manager of Issue #57 line length.
>>>>
>>>>         https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/57
>>>>         <https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/57>
>>>>
>>>>         I was asked to explain why 25 characters was chosen as the
>>>>         threshold. I deferred to the LVTF____
>>>>
>>>>         ​ since I did not write that requirement​____
>>>>
>>>>         . One point that was mentioned was that 25 characters is about
>>>>         the width of most news article columns.
>>>>
>>>>         I did a survey of several top news sites on the web and
>>>>         measured the length of characters when text size is 100% (no
>>>> zoom)
>>>>
>>>>         -CNN 74____
>>>>
>>>>         ​ ​____
>>>>
>>>>         characters without counting spaces 87 with spaces. could
>>>>         narrow to 35 (w/ spaces) in Responsive
>>>>         -NBC 61 no spaces 73 with spaces, could narrow to 39 (w/ spaces)
>>>>         -ABC NEWS 81 no spaces 92 Spaces, could narrow to 43 in
>>>> responsive
>>>>         -FoxNews 67 no space 79 spaces could narrow to 45 in responsive
>>>>         -Le Droit french 74 no space, 86 with spaces, no responsive
>>>>         -Google News 73 No Spaces 87 with spaces could narrow to 44 in
>>>>         responsive
>>>>         - Huff post French 67 no spaces 79 with spaces no responsive____
>>>>
>>>>         ​N____
>>>>
>>>>         one of these sites passed the new SC proposal of 25
>>>>         characters. They all went to horizontal scroll when window was
>>>>         narrowed less than those ____
>>>>
>>>>         ​minimum character ​____
>>>>
>>>>         widths shown above.____
>>>>
>>>>         ​Do we____
>>>>
>>>>          want to make the minimum a little wider, say 45 or 50
>>>> characters.
>>>>
>>>>         For reference, the following is about 25 characters:____
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         "This test assesses basic"____
>>>>
>>>>         __ __
>>>>
>>>>         __ __
>>>>
>>>>         Cheers,
>>>>         David MacDonald____
>>>>
>>>>          ____
>>>>
>>>>         *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*____
>>>>
>>>>         Tel:  613.235.4902 <tel:(613)%20235-4902>____
>>>>
>>>>         LinkedIn
>>>>         <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>____
>>>>
>>>>         twitter.com/davidmacd <http://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
>>>> >____
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     ____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     -- ____
>>>>
>>>>     John Foliot____
>>>>
>>>>     Principal Accessibility Strategist____
>>>>
>>>>     Deque Systems Inc.____
>>>>
>>>>     john.foliot@deque.com <mailto:john.foliot@deque.com>____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion____
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>


-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion

Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2017 15:00:25 UTC