- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2017 03:33:41 -0600
- To: David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Cc: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Hello David and all, Thank you. I have updated the proposed SC text. https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Comment_Summary_1-4-13 Can anyone not live with the current text? Kindest Regards, Laura On Nov 24, 2017 4:25 PM, "David MacDonald" <david@can-adapt.com> wrote: > I agree with the note, and I can live without "essential". I would in that > case interpret "content of functionality" to not include minor problems > that don't interfere with getting the information and using the page ... > > > Cheers, > David MacDonald > > > > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* > Mobile: 613.806.9005 <(613)%20806-9005> > > 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 Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Laura Carlson < > laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi David and all, >> >> As mentioned on issue 576, based on an evaluation of 67 pages [1] >> tested between July 25 and August 3, 2017 that included top 50 Alexa >> pages and some smaller pages, the combined metrics specified in the >> Adapting Text SC should be feasible in WCAG 2.1 for HTML documents. >> Spacing is able to adapt without loss of content or functionality >> across a wide range of sites. In addition, recently 9 mega menus [2] >> were tested and passed the SC. >> >> As you know the Working Group will be going through the implementation >> process and demonstrating the implementability of all the new SCs. If >> you know of examples in the wild of text in UI - (e.g. menus, etc) >> where it would not be possible to meet the SC, please add them to >> issue 576. We can tag that issue with the "Implementation Follow-up" >> label to ensure that it is re-reviewed at that point in the process. >> >> But with that said, David, could you live with the current text that >> removes the word "essential", if we added an editor's note such as: >> >> "Editors Note: The Working Group seeks examples in the wild of text >> content outside of blocks of text where it would be impossible to meet >> this SC. The SC's scope may be narrowed based upon implementation >> testing." >> >> For reference the current proposed SC text [3] reads: >> >> <quote> >> Success Criterion 1.4.13 Text Spacing >> >> If the technologies being used allow the user agent [4] to set text >> [5] style properties [6], then no loss of content or functionality >> occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style >> property: >> >> * Line height (line spacing) to at least 1.5 times the font size; >> * Spacing underneath paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size; >> * Letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 times the font size; >> * Word spacing to at least 0.16 times the font size. >> >> <end quote> >> >> Thank you. >> >> Kindest Regards, >> Laura >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Results_of_Bookmarklet_Tests_ >> for_Issue_78 >> [2]https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/576#issuecomment-345843140 >> [3] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Comment_Summary_1-4-13#SC_Text >> [4] https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-user-agent >> [5] https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-text >> [6] https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-style-properties >> >> On 11/14/17, David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com> wrote: >> >> My concern is that “nothing important is lost” risks making the SC not >> > reliably testable. I would prefer to avoid such language. By doing so, >> > accessibility is also enhanced. >> > >> > I agree that testability is always a concern. However, without a >> qualifier, >> > then any minor artifacts in the transition will fail WCAG. If we remove >> > essential and don't replace it with another qualifier, then I think it >> > should be limited to "blocks of text" >> > https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/576 >> > >> > We've had 2 reputable commenters who are veteran full time accessibility >> > professionals and testers, ask that this SC get changed to "Blocks of >> > Text", >> > Jan Richards of the IDRC <https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/551>, >> and >> > Aiden >> > from TD Bank <https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/469>. >> > I'd like to add my voice to that concern. I was the author of SC 1.4.8 >> in >> > WCAG 2.0. And the "blocks of text" language was carefully negotiated, I >> > never could have got through without that. I think we should carefully >> > consider "Blocks of Text". Without that, there are a lot of variables, >> and >> > possible confusion. It might become a stumbling block for the SC in CR. >> > >> > >> > Cheers, >> > David MacDonald >> > >> > >> > >> > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> > Mobile: 613.806.9005 >> > >> > 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 Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:37 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> >> wrote: >> > >> >> My concern is that “nothing important is lost” risks making the SC not >> >> reliably testable. I would prefer to avoid such language. By doing so, >> >> accessibility is also enhanced. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david@can-adapt.com] >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 14, 2017 9:30 AM >> >> *To:* Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> >> >> *Cc:* Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>; White, Jason J < >> >> jjwhite@ets.org>; Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>; >> WCAG >> >> <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> >> *Subject:* Re: Deal with the word "essential" now or tackle it later? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I don't think we want to loose the idea that "some" loss of content and >> >> functionality is acceptable as long as nothing important is lost. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> David MacDonald >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> >> >> >> Mobile: 613.806.9005 <(613)%20806-9005> >> >> >> >> LinkedIn >> >> >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A% >> 2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdavidmacdonald100&data=02% >> 7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254% >> 7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837 >> 116&sdata=Lir2vskakn6MX2frF8w6y4JbAcCu8fxJ9Qwb9Cgb300%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> twitter.com/davidmacd >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A% >> 2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets. >> org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f >> 37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=Elps11ImTbC >> Teuk3mmmINFY5H7ANDzaJTZK9gD1liPA%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> GitHub >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FDavidMacDonald&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite% >> 40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34 >> fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=DAmBg >> c3O%2FNy3QlufeouMu33tedymPTWeOBo%2B1%2BcI6AQ%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> www.Can-Adapt.com >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A% >> 2F%2Fwww.can-adapt.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets. >> org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f >> 37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=KV0lh06nLBD >> fm1q2sdulGjq6Qe6IbOLEHuOzTuhJ8AA%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> * Adapting the web to all users* >> >> >> >> * Including those with disabilities* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A% >> 2F%2Fwww.davidmacd.com%2Fdisclaimer.html&data=02%7C01 >> %7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0b >> a6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116& >> sdata=SHmjoeBrQIoI1I3kn%2BLYFG8CFgOhY39ru0q3kw4PL%2BE%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Laura Carlson < >> >> laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Jason, David, Andrew, Steve, and all, >> >> >> >> Regarding the latest proposed adapting text SC text, Jason wrote [1]: >> >> >> It doesn't eliminate the use of the word "essential", which is not >> >> >> here >> >> used in accordance with its WCAG definition. >> >> >> >> David wrote [2]: >> >> > That word is in both proposals so I think we should consider that >> >> separately... perhaps you can file an issue on github. >> >> >> >> It seems we already have an open issue for Use of "essential" for >> >> several SCs including adapting text. It is #372 [3]. >> >> >> >> Andrew, Issue 372 wasn't listed for Adapting Text SC (or any of the >> >> others) in your November 6 email [4] so I didn't add to the the Wiki >> >> page with the rest of proposals for resolving Adapting Text issues >> >> [5]. Should I add it to the Wiki page? Or should we deal with Issue >> >> 372 later? >> >> >> >> On September 25, Steve commented in Issue 372 regarding the use of the >> >> word "essential" in the Adapting Text SC. He said [6]: >> >> >> >> "The criterion refers to "no loss of essential content or >> >> functionality". The word seems to have been introduced by @awkawk in a >> >> comment way back in March [7], but I could not find any rationale for >> >> its inclusion in the language (i.e. an example of content loss that >> >> would be acceptable). Given this, and the fact that both Resize Text >> >> and Zoom Content refer to "loss of content or functionality" without >> >> using essential, I propose to simply remove the word from this SC." >> >> >> >> Andrew and all, would you be able to live with removing the word >> >> essential from the SC? >> >> >> >> Thank you. >> >> >> >> Kindest Regards, >> >> Laura >> >> >> >> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017OctDec/0 >> 376.html >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-gl% >> 2F2017OctDec%2F0376.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C >> 8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6dd >> d9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=gPwzB5W4eBS3GtUOF >> n3zkoFkL6xahJJ4%2BmlC%2F%2FVxkAo%3D&reserved=0> >> >> [2]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017OctDe >> c/0374.html >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-gl% >> 2F2017OctDec%2F0374.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C >> 8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6dd >> d9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=cT0UhrvKsF0t5IUWB >> k8F6xRpIy%2Fqh9ncj7M3%2BxJrS8s%3D&reserved=0> >> >> [3] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/372 >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F372&data= >> 02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c32 >> 54%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054 >> 837116&sdata=gagg72um8D90V1Wo59oTQu4pdDddMx19x%2Fn0a413tPk%3D&reserved=0> >> >> [4] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017OctDec/0 >> 313.html >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-gl% >> 2F2017OctDec%2F0313.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C >> 8cdf0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6dd >> d9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=XLm%2FxtYIeB3ZqrZ >> aYDfGxWvBj0okkd2QUBcL3Vu6%2Fo0%3D&reserved=0> >> >> [5] >> >> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Comment_Summary_1-4-13 >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FComment_Summary_1-4- >> 13&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cdf0413de084479e0 >> 6408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C >> 636462666054837116&sdata=5uk17yXjWGErchrzKJvhwXLoJYne6GDY5U6 >> OZ536r2M%3D&reserved=0> >> >> [6] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/372#issuecomment-331950411 >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F372%23issu >> ecomment-331950411&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cd >> f0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e >> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=JISpZMF9yF9tGJGJd5Xu >> 8BhDIqu%2BogD01ukBRb%2BxOmE%3D&reserved=0> >> >> [7] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-289792275 >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% >> 3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F78%23issue >> comment-289792275&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C8cd >> f0413de084479e06408d52b6c3254%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e >> 9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636462666054837116&sdata=sspSef%2BcIJClGUIh2l >> OnmT4YzSm4IkJeCJ4YaA1RiZI%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Laura L. Carlson >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> >> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or >> >> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for >> whom >> >> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this >> >> e-mail >> >> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, >> or >> >> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and >> >> delete >> >> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. >> >> >> >> Thank you for your compliance. >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- >> Laura L. Carlson >> > >
Received on Saturday, 25 November 2017 09:34:12 UTC