Re: [PROPOSAL] Checkpoint 4.1Configure text size.

I agree we should not reopen old issues lightly, but we have a concern 
raised by a developer who has made an extensive review of the document and 
was not satisfied with our response.  I think his stated goals are the same 
as the working group goals, to define a range of values for font size that 
are usable by people with visual impairments, but don't require features 
that are not useful.  Our current requirements clearly require font sizes 
that are not useful for accessibility for many operating environments, at 
least at a P1 level.  I think that when a developer makes the effort that 
Tantek has made to help the group clarify this issue it is important for 
the group to reconsider its previous resolutions.  We want developers 
focusing their resources on creating features that really help people with 
disabilities and not adding features that do not clearly benefit people 
with disabilities, but help them satisfy the guidelines.


At 02:48 PM 7/11/2001 -0400, gregory j. rosmaita wrote:
>aloha, jon, ian, and tantek!
>with every attempt to massage the checkpoint, the intent and purpose of
>the checkpoint becomes less clear, and the ramifications more
>problematic...  i am still unconvinced that the current 4.1
>needs any tweaking -- and each proposal only strengthens that
>BORE, n.  A person who talks when you wish him to listen.
>                  Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
>Gregory J. Rosmaita,

Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
College of Applied Life Studies
University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL  61820

Voice: (217) 244-5870
Fax: (217) 333-0248



Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2001 15:18:17 UTC