- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:39:38 -0600
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Cc: Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>, GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Hi Alastair and all, Thanks you! Here is a combo version with your metrics plugged in: "No loss of content or functionality on a webpage is caused by overriding: * font-family to [Comic Sans], or * foreground and background to white on black, or * line-height of all text to 1.3 and spacing around elements containing text to 0.5em Thoughts? Kindest Regards, Laura On 1/24/17, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > Hi Gregg, > > So working from those principles I think we have to keep the SCs separate, > as they have different levels of difficulty and different boundaries of how, > or how-much a user can adapt them. > > First punts in this direction: > > Font-family: Changing the font-family used on a web page to [Comic Sans] > does not cause loss of content or functionality. > > NB: If we use comic sans people will think we’re trolling designers, does > someone know of a ‘nicer’ font that is cross-platform and of a similar > size/proportion? We can use Arial otherwise, it is just to pick up where > people rely on a tiny font-family and don’t allow buffer, or use font-icons > badly. > > Colors: Changing the foreground and background colors used on a web page to > white on black does not cause a loss of content or functionality. > > NB: Specifying a colour combination helps in general, as it should highlight > most issues. But, it could miss particular situations like a dark background > image, where the test passes but someone using dark-on-light text would find > an problem. Any ideas? > > Spacing: Changing the line-height of all text to 1.3 and spacing around > elements containing text to 0.5EM does not cause loss of content or > functionality. > > NB: Line height it best dealt with as unit-less [1]. Also, I know I’m going > to get some comments such as “why don’t you recommend pixels for this?”, > because I always do recommend pixels. The answer is that EMs are relative to > the text they enclose, even though they are calculated to pixels. If we > can’t say EM because it is too technology-specific, perhaps spacing of “½ > the font-size of the text” could be used? > > Cheers, > > -Alastair > > 1] http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2006/02/08/unitless-line-heights/ > > PS. I running training tomorrow, so probably radio-silence from me. Sigh of > relief all round? ;-) > > > > -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2017 22:40:13 UTC