W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2018

RE: Font accessibility

From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 18:03:23 -0500
To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
Cc: Gian Wild <gian@accessibilityoz.com>, "Olaf Drümmer" <olaflist@callassoftware.com>, w3c WAI List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "Ron Lucey" <Ron.Lucey@gov.texas.gov>
Message-Id: <OF21B08F87.B6968BF1-ON862582B7.00794B29-862582B7.007EAA95@notes.na.collabserv.com>
Jonathan wrote:
. . . I think the reason [font accessibility] has not been addressed for 
web content is that historically browsers have provided the ability for 
users to apply their own styles and fonts and thus this has allowed these 
issues to become more usability type issues.  However there are situations 
where the user cannot overwrite the font such as embedded content, native 
content, print content, etc.  there is also a trend away from user agents 
allowing user level style sheets and pages also preventing extensions like 
Stylish to add document level styles.

Reply:
we cannot advocate for or allow a trend of a one size font fits all. 
Jonathan, I'm not saying that is what you're saying, but I am trying to 
use your observations that we as a community need to keep advocating for 
the browsers and user agents and assistive technologies to solve this 
need.  Font selection should not ever primarily be a content or web author 
responsibility /  issue.  Sure its a consideration, and sure there is a 
font selection that fits *most* users, or *many* users, but accessibility 
is about adapting the content to fit *all users* or at least as many users 
as possible.  Font selection should always start with the browser, user 
agent, and user selection and then only be a content issue when the font 
is *locked* by the author / content developer.  Same with magnification, 
and the same with contrast - meaning that the content and web author's 
responsibility is to allow for changes and adaptions of their content by 
the user agent's settings for font, contrast, and magnification. 

If there is a "trend away from user agents allowing user level style 
sheets . . . " then perhaps that is a problem that we as a community have 
caused or at least should be advocating against!, and a lot louder than it 
seems we are asking authors to settle on or choose some single font that 
fits many users.  Where is the movement to require UAAG compliance of the 
small number of browser manufactures?  Sure, there are print choices that 
can't be changed once printed, and PowerPoint font choices that can't be 
changed during actual presentations, but when we're talking about digital 
accessibility, web accessibility, that is when I try to advocate 1st and 
foremost for adaptability, not a one-size-fits-all single font choice 
approach. 

What do you mean by "embedded content" and "native content"? Shouldn't the 
browser or user agent be able to override that content's font too?    If 
it should, or could, but isn't, then we as a community should be advocate 
for it.  As that late night legal commercial goes, "We demand justice!" 
from the browsers.

btw, the Texas Governors Committee on Persons with Disabilities did some 
research and recommend Verdana fonts for all their PowerPoint 
presentations and printed materials.  See 
https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/organization/.../19_PP_02.docx 

We have a resource about Contacting Organizations about Inaccessible 
Websites; we need one about Contacting Organizations about Inaccessible 
Browsers!

Possible ways to send issues to the browsers:
        Send feedback about Google Chrome at 
https://www.google.com/accessibility/get-in-touch.htm
        Send feedback about Microsoft Edge at 
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/accessibility
        Send feedback about Mozilla Firefox at   
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Accessibility 

___________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins
Check out the new system for requesting an IBM product Accessibility 
Conformance Report VPAT® at  able.ibm.com/request
pjenkins@us.ibm.com
Senior Engineer & Accessibility Executive
IBM Research Accessibility



From:   Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
To:     "Olaf Drümmer" <olaflist@callassoftware.com>, Gian Wild 
<gian@accessibilityoz.com>, w3c WAI List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Date:   06/21/2018 10:13 PM
Subject:        RE: Font accessibility



That much said - legibility as such is a usability aspect not an 
accessibility aspect. Accessibility rules though could build on top of 
usability aspects and require a heighten degree of usability.
 
I?d say legibility is an accessibility issue because it affects people 
with disabilities at a disproportional level.  A font that is legible for 
a fully sighted person may be totally unusable by someone with low vision. 
 I think the reason this has not been addressed for web content is that 
historically browsers have provided the ability for users to apply their 
own styles and fonts and thus this has allowed these issues to become more 
usability type issues.  However there are situations where the user cannot 
overwrite the font such as embedded content, native content, print 
content, etc.  there is also a trend away from user agents allowing user 
level style sheets and pages also preventing extensions like Stylish to 
add document level styles.
 
Jonathan
From: Olaf Drümmer <olaflist@callassoftware.com> 
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 5:12 AM
To: Gian Wild <gian@accessibilityoz.com>; w3c WAI List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Cc: Olaf Drümmer <olaflist@callassoftware.com>
Subject: Re: Font accessibility
 
Some fonts are more legible than others. This has been addressed by 
various standards, for example in the field of ergonomics and also in the 
context of regulation for labels on food or pharmaceutical items.
 
That much said - legibility as such is a usability aspect not an 
accessibility aspect. Accessibility rules though could build on top of 
usability aspects and require a heighten degree of usability.
 
It is important to understand that legibility rules depends a lot on 
context: viewing distance, amount of text, purpose of the information 
conveyed, etc. A long text benefits from a different font than the four 
letters 'STOP' on a stop sign.
 
 
Olaf
 
 
On 21. Jun 2018, at 10:58, Gian Wild <gian@accessibilityoz.com> wrote:
 
Hi
 
Does anyone have some research or evidence about the accessibility of 
different fonts? We have come across a very thin-lined font and we have 
been asked for proof that it is harder to read than normal font.
 
Thanks
Gian
 
(Sorry for cross-posting)
 
Get Outlook for iOS
 
Received on Monday, 25 June 2018 23:03:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:37:17 UTC