Support this, as level A doesn’t have any low vision issues. Reflow in my view is far more useful.
[cid:image001.png@01D61C7F.E2E43800]
Sean Murphy | Digital System specialist (Accessibility)
Telstra Digital Channels | Digital Systems
Mobile: 0405 129 739 | Desk: (02) 9866-7917
From: Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, 24 February 2020 9:56 AM
To: W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>; GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Tom Jewett <tom@knowbility.org>
Subject: Change 1.4.10 to Level AA
[External Email] This email was sent from outside the organisation – be cautious, particularly with links and attachments.
Dear AGWG,
There is one thing you that would make a big difference for people with low vision. Change Reflow 1.4.10 from AA to A. This can be done with WCAG 2.2, we don't have to wait for Silver.
There are two good reasons to do this. It is vitally important for almost everyone with low vision. It is as important to low as text-to-speech is to blindness. The second reason is that the overwhelming majority of sightes nearly meet 1.4.10. So, no cutting edge technology is required. It is dead simple to make a case that works at 320 by 768.
The main reason AG got this wrong in the first place is that the Low Vision support communnity grossly underestimated the print size needed to read with low vision. The simple fact is that the print size needed to read is almost a linear function 1/(visual acuity). If your vision is 20/80 you need print that is 4 times as big. We already worked out how to make 400% into 1000% by varying viewing distance.
The second reason everyone got this wrong is reflow itself. Almost nobody, including me, realized that horizontal scrolling takes as much work as it does. I was probably the most startled by my own discovery.
I suppose we didn’t make it Level A because we didn’t think it could be met so easily. It can.
Moving it to level A would be to give it the status it needs.
Best, Wayne
