W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Request for assistance

From: Dan B. <danb@kempt.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:49:03 -0400
Message-ID: <50627B2F.1060004@kempt.net>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Devarshi Pant wrote:
> ** My two cents.
> (1) Most everybody knows about poor acuity, sharpness of focus, and
> that magnification is the usual fix, but many are not aware that it
> also calls for word wrap to keep the copy on the screen when
> magnified.
> ** SC 1.4.8 (Level AAA): Visual Presentation
> [http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-visual-presentation.html].
> Since this is a multi-part criterion (5 requirements in all), a fix
> could address your concern in (3). 9th para under the intent refers to
> word wrap, and I quote, “Wrapping should always be possible as long as
> words are not so long that a single word is more than half the width
> of a full screen. Very long URIs may run off the side of an enlarged
> screen, but they would not be considered text for "reading" and,
> therefore, would not violate this provision.”

Why is that specified in terms of the width of the _screen_ instead of
on the width of the _browser_ window (or, actually, the page display
area in the browser)?

Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2012 03:50:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:41 UTC