Re: [EXT] Target size updates

+1

The note that explains line-height makes it clear that it would be inclusive of line-spacing (CSS or Word, for example) and line-height for some other applications.


From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Monday, December 19, 2022 at 3:48 PM
To: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: [EXT] Target size updates
Hi everyone,

Please +1 if this seems fine, or comment / question if it does not.
(This is prior to a Call for Consensus”.)

At the WCAG 2.x meeting on Friday we discussed two updates to Target Size (Min).


  1.  Inline exception

We updated the working document:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1khsB3Qo8P8VkvTOw2_akHJx_PiXF8HuZ6uKc7uyI1qQ/edit#<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1khsB3Qo8P8VkvTOw2_akHJx_PiXF8HuZ6uKc7uyI1qQ/edit>

Notes:

  *   We went with “line-height” as simpler language, and added a note to explain that can mean width if it is a vertical language.


  *   “constrained by” does not mean a link has to be the maximum size of the line-height, it means that the line-height has to be less than 24px.
I.e. an 8px high link (such as a superscript text-link) is excepted if the line height is under 24px. it doesn’t have to be the height of the line-height.


  *   It starts with “The target is in a sentence” as that captures many cases in a simple to understand way.


  *   If this is approved, we can do an errata for 2.5.5 separately https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/2857

That change (for 2.5.8) is in PR 2856:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2856/files



  1.  Target offset

We went with idea 7 from this working document:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qhh9VgBC_6HD2emkvql2Hn83iSChwlhGBs5_E9gkdEM/edit#heading=h.j7ts5ij6ruh4

Notes:

  *   The SC text is updated to say “the target is non-overlapping and has a target offset of at least 24 CSS pixels to every adjacent target.”. Removing overlapping targets from the scope removes a lot of the odd/niche cases.


  *   The notes have been moved into the main definition text so they are normative.


  *   It continues with the goal of keeping it simpler by considering the horizontal and vertical axes as the primary methods of calculation.

This is in PR: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2798/files

These represent solutions to issues raised during CR, and we would like to get approval on these very soon.

If you have any concerns, please raise them here. If none of forthcoming we’ll CFC them soon.

Kind regards,

-Alastair

--

@alastc / www.nomensa.com<http://www.nomensa.com>