Re: Discussion: Change to SC 2.6.2 Orientation

--
Detlev Fischer
testkreis c/o feld.wald.wiese
Thedestr. 2, 22767 Hamburg

Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45
Fax +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5

http://www.testkreis.de
Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites

Patrick H. Lauke schrieb am 18.10.2017 17:41:

> On 18/10/2017 16:36, Detlev Fischer wrote:
> 
>> In my view, the SC text should *not* refer to a mechanism if only for reason
>> that it will give developers the idea that introducing controls for locking /
>> unlocking on the content level might be a smart idea. KISS!
> 
> But if the outcome of having a control that locks/unlocks/sets 
> orientation results in users being able to use the content, and the end 
> result is accessible/solves the problem that the SC wants to address, 
> then it should be a valid approach, no?

Sure, it would be. I would just prefer to see that in the Understanding doc and not overload the SC text too much. But if others think it has to be done, so be it..

> 
> P
> -- 
> Patrick H. Lauke
> 
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
> 

Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2017 16:04:47 UTC