Re: CFC - Changes to Target Size for Issue 631

an extremely luke-warm +1

I currently agree with aspects of Patrick's comments (which is why I was
proposing that one axis - height or width -  be 44 pix, and the other axis
be the default font size, thus specifying both height and width, albeit
obtusely to a certain extent). David's response is mostly correct, but with
only one measurement, the possibility of abuse exists.

In the interest of consensus however, I can live with this as proposed,
even if it is my opinion that we will hear from others that this has issues
as written today.

JF

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Repsher, Stephen J <
stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:

> -1
>
> I’m all for compromise, but this CFC has landed on math that is completely
> illogical and I cannot live with it.
>
>
>
> The impetus was that most targets would likely have a height of at least
> the default text size of 16px (which I completely disagree with but let’s
> run with it).  So we’re saying that a pass is given to a target with
> dimensions of 44 x 16px, which has a target area of 704 square pixels and a
> maximum length along the diagonal of about 47px.
>
>
>
> However, a target with dimensions of 34 x 34px would fail even though it
> has 64% more area for the user to hit (1,156 square pixels) and a slightly
> longer diagonal of over 48px.  Asking anyone to swallow such an illogical
> criterion does not make any sense and certainly shouldn’t be in a candidate
> W3C recommendation.
>
>
>
> The only way this is going to work is to go back to a square target area
> that we can defend, and come up with exceptions that everyone can live with.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> *From:* Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 10, 2018 1:55 PM
> *To:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* CFC - Changes to Target Size for Issue 631
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> Call For Consensus — ends January 12 at 1:45pm Boston time.
>
>
>
> The Working Group has discussed a change to the Target Size SC in response
> to issue 631 (https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/631) and
> discussion. This was discussed on the call (https://www.w3.org/2018/01/
> 10-ag-minutes.html#item06).
>
>
>
> The specific changes are detailed in this pull request:
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/678  (see implemented at
> http://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/Issue631/guidelines/index.html#target-size)
>
>
>
> 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
>
> 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>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion