W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2016

Re: [mediaqueries] status and moving forward

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:42:03 -0500
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <56D725EB.1090608@inkedblade.net>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:01 UTC