- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 22:04:18 -0500
- To: Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>
- Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>, GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAdDpDZ10kcHAjSiyxhpZug=nsXnxZVW3N6rjRh4+rHuNtCj4g@mail.gmail.com>
+1 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 Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:42 PM, Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu> wrote: > maybe it is a little less awkward formatting (than having the floating > phrase at the end) to put it back inline — now that we have the language. > > > Ability to Override: For web technologies that allow user agents to > change text and background colors, font, or spacing between letters, > words, lines, or paragraphs, nothing is done in the content to prevent the > user agents from making the changes. > > > *Gregg* > > Gregg C Vanderheiden > greggvan@umd.edu > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 9:28 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> > wrote: > > I think I prefer 11 also... but I like the term "override" which could be > the short handle, here it is with Greggs' friendly amendment. > > ===== > User > > override: For web technologies that allow user agents to change any or all > of the following: > > - > text and background colors, > - > font, or > - > spacing between letters, words, lines, or paragraphs, > > nothing is done in the content to prevent these changes > . > ========= > > 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 Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu> > wrote: > >> I concur on 11 >> >> >> 1 , 12, and 13 require the Author to prevent things from happening that >> they have no control over. There is no restriction on what >> modifications are done — yet they are responsible for the result no >> breaking the content. >> >> with 11 - it only requires that they not prevent the modifications from >> being done. >> >> it WOULD be ok for the Author to be sure that any modification THEY do >> will not break the content — but there are so many ways that a user could >> change things that might break content in ways that an author could not >> predict. >> >> ALSO — there is no way to test whether it is impossible to break the >> content with anything the use could do. (In fact we have both cited things >> that a user could do that would definitely break the functionality) >> >> so 11 works. >> >> but others are not testable and not in control of author — for related >> reasons. >> >> >> best >> >> Gregg >> >> >> PS >> >> By the way, you can lower the reading level (calculated) by swapping out >> a few words. >> >> "For web technologies that allow user agents to change any or all of the >> following: >> >> >> - text and background colors, >> - font, or >> - spacing between letters, words, lines, or paragraphs, >> >> nothing is done in the content to prevent these changes." >> >> >> >> Gregg C Vanderheiden >> greggvan@umd.edu >> >> >> >> On Jan 23, 2017, at 5:30 PM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> >> wrote: >> >> Thanks for that Laura, >> >> Sorry, I must have missed your initial one, otherwise I’d have referenced >> it! >> >> I have a preference for 12/13, followed by 1 & 11 for several reasons: >> >> - Any SC sentence with more than about 50 words is probably too long and >> needs simplifying or re-structuring. The complexity of including user-agent >> aspects, the technology, mechanisms… makes that difficult. >> >> - If the SC focuses on what the content needs to allow for, then we can >> drop references to mechanisms, user agents etc. >> >> - User-override of the presentation is possible for the “regular” web >> technologies (including PDF), but if we must have an exception I’d like to >> use a Note (similar in concept to 2.1.1 Keyboard) such as Wayne's “If no >> mechanism exists to change presentational styling on any user agent for the >> target technology, then the author has no responsible to create one.” >> Update: Like 13, but the second sentence is a note. >> >> - The term “Overriding” is explicit about what is happening, whereas >> “Changing the presentation” isn’t as clear about what the scenario is. >> >> Now onto to Gregg's comments :-) >> >> -Alastair >> >> >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2017 03:04:52 UTC