Hi Gregg,
Thank you for your Email and questions.
It has been reported by Jim Allan and members of the Low Vision Task Force
(LVTF) that Acrobat DC and VIP PDF Reader provide support.
The level is an open question and has been debated. We don't have consensus
yet on that point. All 3 of the original SC levels were submitted at AA.
Most commenters on Github would like AAA. At least one person from the LVTF
stated it is a solid AA for many people.
There has been discussion in the LVTF to have an exception for UAs that do
not provide support. Hence Wayne's mechanism disclaimer thread.
As for techniques Alastair is working on a solution ala his bookmarklet.
Wayne has proposed: "Never use !important for online settings..." PDF
techniques haven't been discussed. Perhaps Jim could add that to Thursday's
LVTF agenda?
Thanks again.
Kindest regards,
Laura
On Jan 21, 2017 12:26 PM, "Gregg C Vanderheiden" <greggvan@umd.edu> wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2017, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> "The presentation of content does not interfere with the user agent's
> ability to allow the user to change foreground and background colors, font
> family, or the spacing between characters, words, lines, or paragraphs
> to the element level, for the full range of values allowed by the user
> agent."
>
>
>
>
>
> - This is an appropriate use of the word user - since is isn't about what
> a user can do - but what the user is allowed to do.
>
>
>
> - But I worry about the constraints here. What level was this going at?
> This would look to outlaw any use of PDF even though we have PDF
> techniques — since PDF doesn’t allow these things.
> Also any other technology that does not have a CSS like markup.
>
> - is 2.1 moving to an HTML only web page approach?
>
>
> - or does "for the full range of values allowed by the user agent.”
> mean that if the user agent can’t make these changes (e.g. for PDF) then
> the content passes without doing any of these things?
>
>
>
> - I see no problem with something like this at AAA but wouldn’t putting
> it at A or AA limit the application of 2.1 to HTML or markup languages. I
> might be wrong here - so this is a question rather than an assertion.
>
>
>
> - As before — Do you have sufficient techniques for meeting this SC with
> different technologies? That was one of the key tests we always used when
> creating a new SC in 2.0. That would clarify what this means and what is
> possible and which technologies can be used.
>
> Would there be a sufficient technique for this SC for PDF?
>
>
> Gregg
>
> Gregg C Vanderheiden
> greggvan@umd.edu
>
>
>
>
>