- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:42:03 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 02/29/2016 03:19 AM, Florian Rivoal wrote: > > While I believe that in most cases this will be an improvement, > and only extremely rarely will it actually make things worse, > whether or not this is true does vary on a site per site basis. > Would you be more comfortable with the a11y paragraph if we > called that out, and encouraged UAs that wish to expose this > as a preference for a11y reasons to have the ability to switch > on a per site basis? No. >> I can live with light-level shipping as-is if we remove the a11y-related >> suggestions, if you feel this is critical. > > I understand that having specialized MQs for a11y, and having > authors use them, would lead to better results than using a > vague proxy. But until we have these a11y MQs — and even after > we do since most authors cannot be expected to tailor their > stylesheets for audiences they are barely aware of — I fail > to see the harm in calling out the fact that light-level is a > half-way decent approximation of these a11y concerns. Authoring well for accessibility is difficult enough without having half-assed solutions introduced this year mixed up with better solutions introduced two years from now. If we want authors to have a chance of learning to do it right, we need to give them that ability from the start. And until we have that, don't teach them to do it sort-of-mostly-wrong-but-kinda-okay. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2016 17:42:31 UTC