Re: Target size updates

Yep that fixes my concern. 


gregg



> On Dec 20, 2022, at 1:14 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Gregg,
>  
> Two changes to the same SC, so two PRs in case one doesn’t get approved. 1) Inline, (2) Target offset.
>  
> From the original email, the ‘working doc’ has various examples for the inline exception:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1khsB3Qo8P8VkvTOw2_akHJx_PiXF8HuZ6uKc7uyI1qQ/edit#
>  
> The new text is:
> “Inline: The target is in a sentence, or the size of the target is otherwise constrained by the line-height of non-target text;”
>  
> So you need non-link text in the same line/flow as link text.
>  
> In a mixed list, you’d want the list items to have sufficient vertical size/space, but if you have non-link text within the item then one or more links within the item are excepted.
>  
> -Alastair
>  
>  
> From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@vanderheiden.us>
> Date: Tuesday, 20 December 2022 at 01:51
> To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> Cc: w3c-waI-gl@w3. org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Target size updates
> 
> They were both in the same email so I thought they were both the current draft.
>  
> Question:
> If we limit it to sentences or multiple sentences, then how do we deal with bullet lists and menus and anyplace else where there is text but not full sentences. 
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> On Dec 19, 2022, at 3:29 PM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
>  
> “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.
> GV: Is there also a note to this effect?   This is good but not clear from SC without a note
> 
> 
> AC: I think the logic of it is clear, as it is an exception to the initial SC text, I’d hope that a couple of examples in the understanding would do the job.
>  
>  
> GV: the full text in   #2798 says    "The target is in a sentence or block of text;"    ( This is good)  Do we define "block of text"?
>  
> I think that might be a miss-read (that PR is for the target offset), the new text <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fpull%2F2856%2Ffiles&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7Cefc057bb4d4045fdab5c08dae22cac05%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638070978740267906%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OL%2FjjXJP0r4GTtld0D4ziX2tiU6Mz%2BOIt0eTgRfJGys%3D&reserved=0> for the inline exception does not include “block of text”.
>  
> Also, the definition of “block of text” <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG22%2F%23dfn-blocks-of-text&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7Cefc057bb4d4045fdab5c08dae22cac05%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638070978740267906%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Krpswh4Ns76CWD1ha1q8aUbwEFzle6TCyvgVY%2Bc15zw%3D&reserved=0> is “more than one sentence of text”, so the current wording for 2.5.5 is effectively: The target is in a sentence, or more than one sentence of text”. That’s why I think the new wording would be better for both SCs.
>  
> -Alastair