Re: Clarification on Pointer Gesture proposal was RE: CFC - Pointer Gestures SC

Hi,
In order to sort out the concern that long press and double click would 
appear to violate "2.5.1 Pointer Gestures" in its current form, I have 
proposed a change to the SC text and updated the Understanding doc 
accordingly.

The pull request is here:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/584

The new proposed SC text is:

2.5.1 Pointer Gestures: All functionality which uses multipoint or timed 
gestures for operation can be operated with a single-point activation, 
unless a multipoint or timed gesture is essential.

You will notice that I have dropped 'untimed', so "untimed 
single-pointer activation" becomes "single-point activation". Further 
down in the understanding text, I include the sentence:

"While it is preferable that authors use untimed input gestures, timed 
single-point gestures such as long press and double click count as 
single-point activation."

I hope that does the trick...

We may still need a glossary entry for single-point activation.

We may discuss the change later today.

Best,
Detlev


Am 20.11.2017 um 01:20 schrieb Jonathan Avila:
>
> My feeling is that exceptions need to be in the SC as that is what is 
> normative.  In addition, when we have essential we are generally 
> saying that something can’t be done another way and that if removed 
> would fundamentally change it.  The proposed use of essential here is 
> not consistent with how we use it in WCAG 2.0.
>
> Jonathan
>
> Jonathan Avila
>
> Chief Accessibility Officer
>
> *Level Access, inc.*(formerly SSB BART Group, inc.)
>
> (703) 637-8957
>
> Jon.avila@levelaccess.com<mailto:Jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
>
> Visit us online: Website<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/>| 
> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SSBBARTGroup>| 
> Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/ssbbartgroup>| 
> LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah>| 
> Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/>
>
> /Looking to boost your accessibility knowledge? Check out our free 
> webinars!/<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/webinars/>//
>
> //
>
> /The information contained in this transmission may be attorney 
> privileged and/or confidential information intended for the use of the 
> individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not 
> the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, 
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is 
> strictly prohibited./
>
> *From:* Detlev TK [mailto:detlev.fischer@testkreis.de]
> *Sent:* Sunday, November 19, 2017 1:50 AM
> *To:* Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
> *Cc:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Clarification on Pointer Gesture proposal was RE: CFC - 
> Pointer Gestures SC
>
> Hi Jon,
>
> good catch. I memory serves, we did not nail this down conclusively.
>
> In the call, the argument was made that in web apps, gestures like 
> long press and double click are sometimes carried over from the 
> non-web app world, and it would seem odd to outlaw these gestures that 
> people are familiar with in the UA or OS context (and cause a lot of 
> pushback).
>
> If it is consensus to basically exempt timed single point gestures, 
> the question we have to decide is if
>
> - we add an exception to the SC text itself;
>
> - we assume that the use of double click and long press can qualify as 
> essential (e.g. if it is needed to differentiate two actions attached 
> to the same element) and then be exempt, but that these gestures are 
> generally covered; in that case we need to explain that in the 
> understanding document.
>
> I lean towards the second option but others may hold that we need to 
> nail this down in the SC text. Based on the feedback on this thread I 
> will modify the understanding text (or propose another SC rewording).
>
> Detlev
>
>     On 19 Nov 2017, at 02:31, Jonathan Avila
>     <jon.avila@levelaccess.com <mailto:jon.avila@levelaccess.com>> wrote:
>
>     I read the  minutes from the call and it was not clear to me what
>     the decision was on long press.  Is or is not long press a timed
>     gesture?
>
>     Jonathan
>
>     /./
>
>     *From:*Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
>     *Sent:*Friday, November 17, 2017 1:19 PM
>     *To:*WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
>     *Subject:*CFC - Pointer Gestures SC
>     *Importance:*High
>
>     Call For Consensus — ends November 21st at 1:30pm Boston time.
>
>     The Working Group has discussed a change to the Pointer Gestures
>     SC, as proposed in this survey
>     (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/resolving_pointer_gestures/results)
>     and discussed on the November 17 call
>     (https://www.w3.org/2017/11/17-ag-minutes.html#item02).
>
>     If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that
>     have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns
>     result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please
>     let the group know before the CfC deadline.
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     AWK
>
>     Andrew Kirkpatrick
>
>     Group Product Manager, Accessibility
>
>     Adobe
>
>     akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
>
>     http://twitter.com/awkawk
>     <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fawkawk&data=02%7C01%7C%7C54093524ef264326424008d51cd66c05%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636446629619786436&sdata=c5UP0xiniJIppvd6Esu1XA%2FbX1ykpABkhgCCmBp%2Fht8%3D&reserved=0>
>

Received on Monday, 20 November 2017 15:30:02 UTC