+1 to what Alastair said (I much prefer the simpler approach of 2.5 Input
Methods )
*2.5 Input Methods*
*2.5.1 Pointer Gestures*
*2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation*
*2.5.3 Target Size*
*2.5.4 Concurrent Input Mechanisms*
*2.5.5 Motion Actuation (was 2.6.1)*
Goodwitch
glenda sims | team a11y lead | deque.com | 512.963.3773
*web for everyone. web on everything.* - w3 goals
[image: IAAP International Association of Accessibility Professionals:
Certified Professional in Accessibility Core Competencies (CPACC)]
<http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/certification>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:
> Personally: I think both are improvements, overall I prefer the simpler
> approach to 2.5-8 (i.e. just having 2.5).
>
>
>
> There’s a lot of conceptual overlap between speech input, input methods,
> and device settings. For me the simpler grouping matters more than where
> (new) individual SCs go.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Michael Gower
>
>
> Changes from existing editor's draft:
>
> - rename the existing Pointer Accessible guideline to Input Methods
> - remove the word "pointer" from the existing short description of
> the guideline to now read: "Make it easier for users to operate
> functionality."
> - remove Additional Sensor Inputs (put Motion Actuation under Input
> Methods)
> - move Orientation to Adaptable -- where it fits well: "Create content
> that can be presented in different ways (for example simpler layout)
> without losing information or structure."
> - move Character Key Shortcuts to Keyboard Accessible. It is where it
> fits practically and linguistically; speech operability rides on top of the
> keyboard API.
> - move Label in Name to Compatible, where it fits well with the second
> Intention ("exposing information in the content in standard ways that
> assistive technologies can recognize and interact with.")
> -
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2018 01:26:06 UTC