- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:33:33 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 17/01/2018 07:14, Abma, J.D. (Jake) wrote: [...] > The gap between 34 and 44 is not explainable. As from my previous response, link targets in a list with no spacing between and 38px height will fail while link targets in a list only 26px height with 8px spacing will pass? > Also the spacing is not clear what is exactly meant. Most designers don't want spacing between target, or do we mean padding (as we use it in CSS instead of margin...?!) Picking up the spacing thing, I assume this was borne out of Microsoft's comment here/on a call https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2018JanMar/0287.html That message references "recent version of Office" as example of this. As I responded on thread, though, when switching between "mouse optimized" and "touch optimized" in, say, Word 2013, it's not the spacing that increased, but in fact the entire touch target itself - the controls receive more *padding*, but the padding is still clickable/tappable/part of the target size. (see screenshot comparison https://imgur.com/a/Snx1X) So I'm not sure if Alex's comment about spacing/margin is using those terms in the way they've been interpreted here (as in "spacing/margin that isn't tappable/clickable"). P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Wednesday, 17 January 2018 09:34:02 UTC