Re: Adapting Text Units: Spaces, paragraphs, and ems

Hi David,

Interesting idea, but I think a bit *too* messy... for testing purposes
it's usually beneficial to set a minimum and maximum expectation. For
example, if a site could increase the spacing by 1.8% (just pulling a
number out of the air) and everything still "worked", but by increasing the
spacing by 200% and everything fell apart, would that be a pass or fail? At
some point there needs to be a ceiling on a reasonable expectation of
scaling, no?

JF

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 3:28 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> What about a generic test with no measurement.
>
> - Space between paragraphs can be increased.
>
> Sure it will beg the question "by how much?", but we can explain in the
> understanding that ANY value of increase without loss of functionality will
> pass. In other words, if the paragraph spacing increase 10% for some
> paragraphs  and 15% in others, it passes. That would also be true if it was
> 1% increased space for some and 2% for others. Its kind of messy but
> testable.
>
> 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, Jul 12, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Repsher, Stephen J <
> stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:
>
>> The difference is that 1.4.8 requires that a mechanism be available to
>> make the adaptations.  For the SC in question, the assumption is that the
>> user already has a mechanism and the criterion ensures they can execute
>> that adaptation with ease and no losses.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 3:59 PM
>> To: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>; Lisa Seeman <
>> lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
>> Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>;
>> w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Adapting Text Units: Spaces, paragraphs, and ems
>>
>> Hi Stephen and Lisa,
>>
>> Steve, thank you very much for your explanation and work on this. I agree
>> that the paragraph bullet complicate testing Adapting Text SC.
>>
>> On 7/12/17, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:
>>
>> > The other 3 bullets are important because they affect the content
>> > within the element and thus how it is sized is being tested.  What is
>> > being tested with paragraph spacing?
>>
>> Lisa, could you please answer that, as you're the person who is objecting
>> to having the Adapting Text SC in 2.1 without it.
>>
>> Steve, my thought would be the same as WCAG 2.0 1.4.8 Visual
>> Presentation: spacing between paragraphs. It says:
>>
>> "...Line spacing (leading) is at least space-and-a-half within
>> paragraphs, and paragraph spacing is at least 1.5 times larger than the
>> line spacing..."
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20#visual-audio-contrast-visual-presentation
>>
>> Is that untestable?
>>
>> COGA does have their Visual Presentation SC #51:
>> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/51
>>
>> If it would simplify matters, perhaps it could be specified in Issue 51.
>> Lisa your thoughts. Would you object to that?
>>
>> Thanks again.
>>
>> Kindest Regards,
>> Laura
>>
>> On 7/12/17, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:
>> > If paragraph spacing must be included, then we can do it as a factor
>> > on font size just like the rest, although it will have ambiguity as to
>> > which “paragraph’s” font size to use along with much more…
>> >
>> > I purposely did not include it because of all the other layout
>> > questions it raises, and the fact that we’d need a clear definition
>> > for paragraph spacing.  I’m sorry but it’s just nowhere near as
>> > testable as the other 3 bullets.  Here’s some questions we should be
>> prepared to deal with:
>> >
>> > 1.       Which paragraph’s font size do I base the spacing on?
>> >
>> > 2.       Is it spacing before or after or split between the two?
>> >
>> > 3.       Does a heading or sub-heading count as a paragraph?  Seems like
>> > that would be a much bigger distinguisher so I’m assuming no.
>> >
>> > 4.       What if a list, block quote, image, or other element breaks up
>> a
>> > paragraph?  This becomes an important difference depending on the
>> > answers to
>> > 1 and 2.
>> >
>> > 5.       If a paragraph has another visual distinction like a first line
>> > indent or border, is the spacing requirement the same?
>> >
>> > In the end though, I’m having a tough time seeing how a test for
>> > paragraph spacing could ever really fail in the context of this
>> > criterion, and what CSS rules would be used to test it that didn’t
>> > make a lot of assumptions on tags used by the author.  For example, if
>> > I start with a typical site with no negative margins and no absolutely
>> > positioned elements, then what possible content or functionality could
>> be lost by applying:
>> >
>> > p + p {margin-top: 1em}
>> > p ~ p {margin-bottom: 1em}
>> >
>> > The other 3 bullets are important because they affect the content
>> > within the element and thus how it is sized is being tested.  What is
>> > being tested with paragraph spacing?
>> >
>> > Steve
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Katie Haritos-Shea [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 2:23 PM
>> > To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
>> > Cc: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>; public-low-vision-a11y-tf
>> > <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>; Jason White <jjwhite@ets.org>;
>> > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>; Detlev
>> > Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>; Repsher, Stephen J
>> > <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>; Greg Lowney
>> > <gcl-0039@access-research.org>
>> > Subject: Re: Adapting Text Units: Spaces, paragraphs, and ems
>> >
>> > +1 to Stephens technology agnostic language approach.
>> >
>> > Awesome work Wayne, Alistair, Laura etc all...
>> > Katie Haritos-Shea
>> > 703-371-5545
>> >
>> > On Jul 12, 2017 2:11 PM, "Laura Carlson"
>> > <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com<mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Steve,
>> >
>> > How would you propose to phase new paragraph bullet using font size?
>> > Lisa has objected to inclusion of the Adapting Text SC in 2.1 without
>> > it.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> > Kindest Regards,
>> > Laura
>> >
>> > On 7/12/17, Repsher, Stephen J
>> > <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >> We’re not being technology agnostic here.  The truth is that the only
>> >> reason we are drawing a difference between em units and a unitless
>> >> factor on the font size is technology-specific to CSS.  In reality
>> >> they are exactly the same, i.e. for the current element:
>> >>
>> >> `Line-height: 1.5` = `line-height: 1.5em`
>> >>
>> >> The problem is that these are inherited properties, so a length value
>> >> in em passes the same computed length to children, while the factor
>> >> becomes a factor on the child’s font size.  Obviously the latter is
>> >> usually the desired behavior.  Why the CSS standard doesn’t also
>> >> allow factors to be used for `letter-spacing` and `word-spacing` is a
>> >> good question.
>> >>
>> >> So, to be totally technology agnostic here, we ought to pick one and
>> >> be consistent.  Given the confusion that could arise by specifying
>> >> inheritance with em units, I’d strongly vote for the following:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 1.       line height (line spacing) to at least 1.5 times the font size
>> >>
>> >> 2.       letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 times the font size
>> >>
>> >> 3.       word spacing to at least 0.16 times the font size
>> >>
>> >> We can explain what this translates to for CSS in Understanding,
>> >> which is advantageous in case things change.
>> >>
>> >> Steve
>> >>
>> >> From: Alastair Campbell
>> >> [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>]
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 12:17 PM
>> >> To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com<mailto:john.foliot@deque.com>>
>> >> Cc: Laura Carlson
>> >> <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com<mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>>;
>> >> Greg Lowney
>> >> <gcl-0039@access-research.org<mailto:gcl-0039@access-research.org>>;
>> >> Jason White <jjwhite@ets.org<mailto:jjwhite@ets.org>>; Detlev Fischer
>> >> <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de<mailto:detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>>;
>> >> w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>;
>> >> public-low-vision-a11y-tf
>> >> <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org<mailto:public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3
>> >> .org>>
>> >> Subject: Re: Adapting Text Units: Spaces, paragraphs, and ems
>> >>
>> >> That’s fine for me, thanks.
>> >>
>> >> Any objections? Going, going…
>> >>
>> >> -Alastair
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> From: John Foliot
>> >>
>> >> Hi Alastair,
>> >>
>> >> A bit more fine-tuning... how about:
>> >>
>> >> * line-height (spacing) to at least 1.5 em (space line-and-a-half)
>> >> * spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 em (2 lines)
>> >>
>> >> * letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 em
>> >> * word spacing to at least 0.16 em
>> >>
>> >> ???
>> >>
>> >> JF
>>
>> --
>> Laura L. Carlson
>>
>>
>


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

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion