- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 00:18:35 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 17/03/2021 22:53, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > I'd say we should pick an actual desired outcome of either: > > 1) user has a sufficiently large target that they can always confidently > hit/activate (suggesting we always want a minimum size); or > 2) each target has at least a minimum sized exclusion/exclusive area > that, if the user taps anywhere within that, they may or may not manage > to hit that target but at least they won't run the risk of activating > some other target. Expanding on this, it's probably worth taking a step back and trying to see what the SC actually aims to achieve in practice. To my mind at least, it's along the lines of: - a touchscreen user or mouse user needs to be able to activate a target - they're going to be aiming their finger/mouse to the center of the control (or whatever the "thickest" part of the control is, if we imagine some weird SVG clickable shape that's not rectangular) - we want to make sure that there's sufficient clearance in this control (at least a 24x24 area, centered around this central/fattest point of the control) that, even if they aren't accurate with their finger/mouse, they don't risk accidentally triggering something else. Maybe the point of contention/that I'm not getting is that the SC tries to account for the fact that the smaller the target is below 24x24, the harder it is for a user to determine the center/where they want to tap/click? It does seem (unless I'm getting myself confused), that the smaller the target gets below 24x24, the larger the "exclusive area"/spacing effectively becomes. Taking a 24x24 target, its overall exclusive area is literally 24x24. At the extreme end, a 1x1 target needs 23 px spacing on all sides, making its exclusive area 47x47 px. If that's intentional, it should be very clearly spelled out as well and diagrammed. Speaking of diagrams, isn't the middle case of Figure 5 in https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/target-size-minimum.html a Fail rather than a Pass? If we're going from the top of the magnifying glass icon to the closest adjacent bit of the underlying picture, which is 20px away since it butts up against the bottom of the magnifying glass control which is 20px tall?) P -- Patrick H. Lauke https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2021 00:18:50 UTC