Re: Target size Pre-CFC

Hi James,

I think the most recent discussion has been here:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/3045


But for history:

  *   In earlier versions the SC was called Target Spacing (and started at 44px).

  *   After several iterations we had to drop the size of the requirement.

  *   We also realised that what we want to convey is that targets should be a certain size, but allow for odd cases where they need to be smaller with spacing. (Spacing at least prevents mis-targeting, if not hitting the intended target.)

  *   We don’t really have a basis to specify a smaller minimum size. The 24px came from what things like Document toolbars tend to use. We also had a complaint from a low vision user who didn’t want those types of controls to increase in size for their zoomed in perspective.

Without new info (needed for revisiting those decisions), we’ll stick with the normative text and adjust the understanding doc.

Cheers,

-Alastair


From: James Edwards
You don't often get email from edwardsj@tpgi.com. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
With apologies if this has been discussed before (I'm quite new here, and I haven't found anything about this in the archives):

The normative requirements for Target Size (Minimum) allow pointer targets to have any dimensions at all, right down to 0 by 0, if they meet the target spacing exception.

This seems like a big problem to me (unless it's just my misunderstanding?).




James Edwards
________________________________
From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Sent: 07 April 2023 00:29
To: Dan Bjorge <Dan.Bjorge@microsoft.com>; Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>; Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
Cc: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Target size Pre-CFC

CAUTION: This email originated outside Vispero. Do not click links, open attachments or forward unless you recognize the sender.


Thanks everyone,



I’ve updated the PR of the focus-appearance / target-size changes:

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3123




  *   I stuck with the “Spacing: …“  version, as I agree that it is more consistent with the other bullets. All the same words are included, so hopefully that’s ok.
  *   I stuck to the pluralisation of the 1st draft, having re-read it a few times it seemed to have the best grammar/ meaning. We take all undersized targets (plural), put a circle on each (singular), then say that none of the circles (plural) intersect with another target/circle (singular). If the last part were plural, you might get an (odd) argument that it has to be more than one.
  *   Since we dropped the reference to other exceptions, I moved spacing back up to it’s previous position.



If there are any “can’t abide” tweaks, please let me know.



Cheers,



-Alastair





From: Dan Bjorge

As another native English speaker, I agree with Mike’s analysis about the grammar points.



Between “Spacing: Undersized targets (those less than 24 by 24 CSS pixels)…” and “Undersized Target Spacing: Targets less than 24 by 24 CSS pixels…”: I would be satisfied with either option, but slightly prefer the former because I think “Undersized Target Spacing” looks inconsistent when it’s read in the context of all the other exception names.



Thanks very much for driving this, Alastair! I think we’re ending up at something that will be a lot easier for folks to understand.



-Dan



From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2023 5:32 AM
To: Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
Cc: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>; WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Target size Pre-CFC



Thanks Mike,

I'm okay with the wording as it is if the native English speakers say this is correct.



I agree with you that "Undersized Target Spacing: Targets less than 24 by 24 CSS pixels" reads a little better. Slight preference for that, but I can go either way. The key for me was to put that "another target or the circle for another undersized target" part in, and to give an indication of what an undersized target actually is.







On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 6:36 PM Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com<mailto:michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>> wrote:

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<mailto:wilco.fiers@deque.com>>
Date: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 4:00 AM
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>
Cc: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto: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




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






--

Wilco Fiers

Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator ACT Task Force

[cid:BCBD7D4B-677E-4B95-AE3F-60005DBD9EE4]