- From: Joshue O Connor - InterAccess <josh@interaccess.ie>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 08:53:59 +0000
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- CC: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <5C516627.7040506@interaccess.ie>
Alastair Campbell wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Going back to the original question, that was a placeholder indicating > we think there’s a technique there. Dissecting the exact wording it > not helpful at this stage, it hasn’t been drafted. > Thanks Alastair thats helpful (and all for contributions). I guess, I am trying to understand the intent, but appreciate that in its current draft trying to unpick it may not be useful. I guess, the issue with having placeholder techniques, when there may be little existing techniques for any given SC can be confusing for people who are looking for 'how to' advice. Thanks Josh > There is a core question about whether information is lost when > typical ‘pre’ content is wrapped, and if there are reasonable > techniques for overcoming that information loss. > > Wayne outlined the use-case, Patrick outlined some possibilities. > > It needs someone to take it on and write up, OR, perhaps it would be > better to create a positive technique for wrapping code snippets? > > E.g. Technique: Using CSS pre-wrap to allow code examples to wrap. > > People could supplement that with some of the methods Patrick > outlined, but that’s a good start, and doesn’t have the issues with > having to apply to all-possible content (that the failure does). > > I opened an issue for pre-wrap for our own specs a while ago: > > https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/423 > > Just need to get around to adding that to the techniques/understanding > CSS. > > Cheers, > > -Alastair > -- Joshue O Connor Director | InterAccess.ie
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2019 08:54:31 UTC