Re: How 1.4.4 Resize text applies when mobile templates kick in

Patrick,
has your interpretation been adopted and documented in any of the W3C WAI 
docs yet?  Seems reasonable to me.

"Keep in mind that not omitting content/functionality does not mean that 
things still need to all be on the same page when in small viewport 
mode. If a page is feature/content rich on a large screen, it's 
perfectly acceptable for things to be moved to separate views/screens 
when on a smaller viewport (i.e. it doesn't mean that everything now 
just needs to be stacked vertically)."
___________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins
pjenkins@us.ibm.com
Senior Engineer & Accessibility Executive
IBM Research Accessibility
ibm.com/able
facebook.com/IBMAccessibility
twitter.com/IBMAccess
ageandability.com




From:   "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
To:     w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Date:   11/07/2016 07:11 PM
Subject:        Re: How 1.4.4 Resize text applies when mobile templates 
kick in



On 08/11/2016 00:41, Phill Jenkins wrote:
> I think your point:
> "don't completely omit content/functionality at different breakpoints as
> it will affect all users and particularly LV users with zoom"
>
> a. is not well understood by designers.
> b. is harder to do than we accessibility SME's think, otherwise if it
> was easy then designers would be doing it.
> c. many actually think less is better, especially for simplicity and
> ease of use, less cognitive load on the user, etc.
> in other words, that reducing the screen size and thereby reducing the
> content & functionality is actually the goal for some designers.
> Have you noticed how much vertical scrolling that goes on these days in
> newly designed sites?

Keep in mind that not omitting content/functionality does not mean that 
things still need to all be on the same page when in small viewport 
mode. If a page is feature/content rich on a large screen, it's 
perfectly acceptable for things to be moved to separate views/screens 
when on a smaller viewport (i.e. it doesn't mean that everything now 
just needs to be stacked vertically).

One of the reasons why some designers don't do this? The misguided idea 
of "mobile context" meaning "users on a small-screen device don't want 
to do the same things as on a large-screen device"...thinking that has 
been challenged quite vigorously now for the last few years (see for 
instance http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1333).

As for it being hard? Yes, like most web development, it can be...

> Seems
> that some are incorrectly suggesting that the "responsive design" should
> not loose content or functionality.  I don't recall us ever demanding
> that mobile web sites (m dot's) have the same content and functionality
> as desktop web sites, not as an accessibility requirement.  Why now?

Because we're not talking about two distinct websites that can be 
accessed separately (an m dot and a "regular" www site). This is the 
exact same URL which changes based on viewport size, and viewport size 
on desktop is determined by the combination of browser window itself and 
zoom factor. Whereas with the two separate sites a user can (usually) 
switch between them explicitly (by typing in different URL, or using any 
"go to mobile/desktop site" links provided by the site if present), here 
the switch happens based on factors that are separate.

In any case, this was debated at great length a few months ago on this 
list...

-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke