RE: Target size Pre-CFC

I would like to emphasize that we seem to have alignment on using the circle concept for spacing, so at this point we are merely wordsmithing, not proposing differences to the requirement. As such, we can always make editorial tweaks to the wording without affecting the CR process (so long as they do not alter the requirement/exception), correct?

---

I can abide by the proposed wording, although my preference would definitely be to change the preamble to be:
Undersized target spacing: Targets that are less than 24 by 24 CSS pixels are positioned…

To me that is a whole lot more readable than using parentheses, and also draws a clear connection between an exception (smaller target) and a need (more spacing around it). I didn’t hear someone speaking strongly against it, and would still like to advocate for that.

I still consider the final phrase “or the circle for another undersized target “ to be superfluous and would prefer it to just end “or circle”, but since some found it more clear, I’m less concerned with the additional length and redundancy than I am with adopting the prior suggestion.

Wilco, to your points/questions:
- you only need “nor” when it’s preceded by a “neither”. We could rephrase it that way, but it becomes more wordy without making it any clearer, IMO.
- number agreement is not relevant/required in this case, and there are good arguments for why it should be phrased the way it is.
- the comma is grammatically unnecessary (and arguably shouldn’t be there) but if it’s needed for readability because we’ve made the ending longer, I can abide by that. To me, this is another argument for truncation, as per my second suggestion.


Thanks!
Mike



From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 4:00 AM
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Cc: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Target size Pre-CFC
Thanks Alastair, This is much better I think. I'm not an expert on this, but I think the grammar of the last bit is slightly off, and should probably be this: > intersect other targets, nor the circles of other undersized targets. This
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Thanks Alastair,

This is much better I think. I'm not an expert on this, but I think the grammar of the last bit is slightly off, and should probably be this:

> intersect other targets, nor the circles of other undersized targets.

This has three changes:
1. Plural instead of singular. Since you're saying "the circles do not intersect" I think plural for the rest of that is right?
2. "nor" instead of "or", I don't think those circles can intersect with small targets, even if their circle isn't intersecting
3. added a comma


On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 11:53 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote:
Hi everyone,

We had some discussion about this today, including some after meeting ideas thrown in:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N38qrHOJSXW-OrJI7GiSjQwaYZxh5OBDJ36No7p2Ax4/edit#heading=h.fyovk9vwylou<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N38qrHOJSXW-OrJI7GiSjQwaYZxh5OBDJ36No7p2Ax4/edit#heading=h.fyovk9vwylou>

I think the one that would pass most people’s concerns was:

Spacing: Undersized targets (those less than 24 by 24 CSS pixels) are positioned so that if a 24 CSS pixel diameter circle is centered on the bounding box of each, the circles do not intersect another target or the circle for another undersized target.

Personally, I prefer the more concise version, however, I don’t think that will clear objections. So the question now is: Would anyone object to that?

Kind regards,

-Alastair

--

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




--
Wilco Fiers
Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator ACT Task Force
[cid:BCBD7D4B-677E-4B95-AE3F-60005DBD9EE4]