Re: Hoverable condition for Content on Hover or Focus

I already put my comment in the survey, but as long as there's a thread..
 Couldn't we just remove the word "hover" from that bullet and achieve the
same meaning, but in a less confusing way?

Hoverable
If pointer hover can trigger the additional content, then the pointer can
be moved to *<remove> hover </remove>* the additional content;


-Marc


On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Repsher, Stephen J <
stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:

> Hi James,
>
>
>
> I wanted to respond to your objection to the latest CFC language:
>
> > The hoverable statement makes no sense and needs revising. I don't
> understand what "hover the additional content". Does it mean "The
> additional content remains visible while the pointer is over the additional
> content"?
>
>
>
> Yes, that’s exactly what it means.  A previous iteration said something
> similar to your suggestion and I cannot recall why it was changed at the
> moment, but coming up with a way to state this condition that no one finds
> confusing has been a bit of a challenge.  I did my best to explain this
> condition in detail in the draft Understanding
> <https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/content-on-hover-or-focus/understanding/21/content-on-hover-or-focus.html>,
> and there’s also Example 2 to visually show the importance.  (Note I still
> need to update from Visible Trigger to Dismissable in the understanding,
> but the rest is applicable.)
>
>
>
> Can you live with this knowing we can work on this editorially?
>
>
>
> *Steve Repsher*
>
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/steverep> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/steverepsherjr/> | GitHub
> <https://github.com/steverep>
>
>
>