RE: Support as an SC prefix?

Ø  @Laura, as I read this, the author would need to ensure "Support" was authored into the content, rather than provide the actual support.

John, what I think Laura is saying is that the author could choose to build in a widget as a way to meet it rather than supporting it say through responsive design.  So either approach could be used.  The word support may imply that a widget could not be used if the author so chooses.

Jonathan

From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 11:26 AM
To: Laura Carlson
Cc: Alastair Campbell; WCAG
Subject: Re: Support as an SC prefix?

Hi Alistair,

Interesting... we would likely have to detail what "Support" would entail in our Techniques Section, but I like the general idea.

@Laura, as I read this, the author would need to ensure "Support" was authored into the content, rather than provide the actual support. For example, @alt text "supports" a screen reader user, but the author is not required to provide a tool that surfaces that @alt text, only ensure that the conditions are met (i.e. appropriate alt text) when a support tool (aka screen reader) is invoked.

(Alastair, is that a correct understanding of your proposal?)

JF

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com<mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Alastair and all,

Interesting idea regarding having a prefix or some other indicator
that a widget is not required. It would be great to alleviate that
misconception.

But I'm not sure if "support" is the right word. Why wouldn't  an
on-screen widget be considered support?

Kindest Regards,
Laura

On 3/8/17, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> There is an interesting point raised on github for the SCs which are aimed
> at authors enabling something without (necessarily) adding on-screen
> widgets:
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/159#issuecomment-285020097

>
> “Maybe the use of the "Support" prefix would be a useful standard to set for
> the SC titles if an on-screen widget is not required, so that in this case
> it would be "Support Reflow to Single Column", just as we have "Support
> Personalization".
> This would also suggest a rename of 1.4.13 to "Support Printing", for
> example.”
>
> It would be an alternative to the “mechanism is available” language,
> hopefully leading people away from assuming there would be on-screen
> widgets.
>
> If that were taking on, I think it would lead to:
>
> ·         Support linearization (Or ‘Support reflow to single column’)
>
> ·         Support printing (Or ‘Support adaptations when printing’ might be
> more accurate.)
>
> ·         Support adapting text
>
> ·         Support extra symbols.
>
> And possibly others from COGA that didn’t make it to the FPWD.
>
> So two questions:
>
> 1.       Do you think this approach is helpful? And if so,
>
> 2.       Is “support” the right prefix?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> -Alastair
>
> --
>
> www.nomensa.com<http://www.nomensa.com><http://www.nomensa.com/>
> tel: +44 (0)117 929 7333<tel:%2B44%20%280%29117%20929%207333> / 07970 879 653
> follow us: @we_are_nomensa or me: @alastc
> Nomensa Ltd. King William House, 13 Queen Square, Bristol BS1 4NT
>
> Company number: 4214477 | UK VAT registration: GB 771727411
>

--
Laura L. Carlson



--
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