Re: notes on 320 CSS Pixels to inches


On 1/18/18, 1:24 PM, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

...
    This happens regardless of the size of the monitor. Meaning that there
    is zero guarantee that "10mm" defined in CSS will actually result in
    10mm as measured on the actual physical screen.

I should have been clearer, I am not suggesting in any way that authors define size using the problematic CSS physical lengths. My question for this SC is: will 44 CSS Pixels result in meeting what research tells us should be a 10 mm (or 9 or 12) minimum physical size on any device from which the user is trying to select a target with their finger tip?  I assume the answer is no. Larger is always better, we know that. Smaller on the other hand?

    Author have zero control over achieving an SC that mandates a physical
    (as measured in real world on the screen) size. And funnily enough,
    auditors, when testing if content passes or fails, will also not have
    any guarantee that their test is accurate, as they will get different
    results depending on which particular device, mobile phone, etc they
    test on.

So, what's the point of this SC?  Aren't we, for the user's sake, effectively mandating a minimum physical size? If you are trying to support the physical (real) dimensions of what is known from research to be an acceptable minimum target size but the SC requirement can't guarantee that it will actually produce a minimum usable target size for a user who requires it on their device (the audience we are serving through WCAG),  then this SC is pointless.

    WCAG already made this fundamental mistake (of basing something on
    real-world measurements, since they borrowed it from the print world)
    when defining "large scale text" for contrast. Please, let's not make
    this same mistake again...

Agree. Let's not make this mistake.  The only alternative I can think of is (quickly):  All touch targets must have role, state, and name specified so that assistive technologies (or user agent features) can provide alternative selection methods (for example, enlarge target areas).




________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________

Received on Thursday, 18 January 2018 19:10:19 UTC