- From: Chris O'Brien <chrobrien@olg.ca>
- Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 19:32:41 +0000
- To: Steve Green <steve.green@testpartners.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I don't disagree with either of you. It's just a hard sell in many cases for stakeholders only interested in compliance only. The subjectivity can be problematic in these cases.
Chris O'Brien
Director of Accessibility
Legal and Litigation
416.224.7769
OLG Internal
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Green <steve.green@testpartners.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 2:05 PM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: RE: { Sticky Bar } 400% & Keyboard Navigation
This email originated outside of OLG. Do not open attachments or click links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I totally agree with Patrick. To answer the question, you need to decide what's important to you (or whoever's decision it is).
If you only care about strict WCAG conformance, then all that matters is whether any content is completely hidden at 400% zoom.
If you care about the user experience, then you can pick your own percentage cut-off level. There is no "right" answer, but I usually advise our clients to unstick the sticky content when it reaches about 25% of the viewport height.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Sent: 02 March 2021 16:29
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: { Sticky Bar } 400% & Keyboard Navigation
On 02/03/2021 16:08, Chris O'Brien wrote:
> Question regarding the above: in your opinion what is the threshold?
> This pattern presents significant challenges during reflow, and works
> directly against those who need this accommodation (as you know). I
> find this one particularly frustrating because it is clearly an
> anti-pattern yet is it relegated to advisory status.
One follows from the other really: there's no easy-to-agree-on hard cut-off point where you can say "if it covers X% of the content, this is a fail, otherwise a pass", unless we make up an arbitrary number (which makes little sense, since it would then lack any kind of nuance ... what if something only covers a very tiny amount of content, but THAT particular bit of content is actually really (subjectively) important to the user?
Because it's not a simple binary value that can be agreed on, it's much tougher to make it a hard fail condition. Arguably, when things like this have been decided in the past (say, the cut-off for what is good vs bad color contrast), there's always edge cases where failing/passing just seems very arbitrary...
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.splintered.co.uk%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cchrobrien%40olg.ca%7C9eb6fb8132314d26a06b08d8ddaef4af%7Cf271d9b4e54c46e182bd25d50afa3779%7C0%7C0%7C637503090823340093%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=l2apevKSUx6iTKiTpPyqJcqsqMPp%2BmBNt3dLzHogYh4%3D&reserved=0 | https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fpatrickhlauke&data=04%7C01%7Cchrobrien%40olg.ca%7C9eb6fb8132314d26a06b08d8ddaef4af%7Cf271d9b4e54c46e182bd25d50afa3779%7C0%7C0%7C637503090823340093%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=UZ2srcnxSXBusRcpLe3%2F3Q78B8vwrv4Tf%2BJA75ySWW8%3D&reserved=0 https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fflickr.com%2Fphotos%2Fredux%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cchrobrien%40olg.ca%7C9eb6fb8132314d26a06b08d8ddaef4af%7Cf271d9b4e54c46e182bd25d50afa3779%7C0%7C0%7C637503090823340093%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=uRHk0jwAUBrVnSrYXJ01Jo9SyQ%2B6tjkB6ybzmoTCxiI%3D&reserved=0 | https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.deviantart.com%2Fredux&data=04%7C01%7Cchrobrien%40olg.ca%7C9eb6fb8132314d26a06b08d8ddaef4af%7Cf271d9b4e54c46e182bd25d50afa3779%7C0%7C0%7C637503090823340093%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=QGUPcOOkHnDIn1xsBtOWlZ%2Ft1QRx2adAhDkTLmXFeg0%3D&reserved=0
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2021 19:32:55 UTC