This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 8755 - Automatic reduction of text-size is unnecessary
Summary: Automatic reduction of text-size is unnecessary
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/the-xhtml-...
Whiteboard:
Keywords: a11y
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-01-14 15:55 UTC by Gez Lemon
Modified: 2010-10-04 14:30 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Gez Lemon 2010-01-14 15:55:53 UTC
Users with low vision adjust font sizes to the minimum size needed for comfortable reading. Many users with low vision do not use assistive technology, but rather adjust to the largest font size supported by the user agent.  Reducing the size of the font - particularly a text-dense element like "article" - increases the imbalance between font sizes in other parts of the page (e.g. the user would be forced to increase font size for the article text to the point where the font size in the non-nested parts of the page are enlarged so much as to overflow their containers. Automatic reduction of the size is unnecessary and will decrease access for users with low vision.

Proposal: Remove the section. Nested elements should not have the containing text size reduced automatically.  The author can choose to reduce the size of nested text through CSS, but it should not happen to font sizes automatically.
Comment 1 Ms2ger 2010-01-14 18:29:58 UTC
The specification doesn't mandate or even suggest decreasing the font size of article elements.
Comment 2 Michael Cooper 2010-02-11 17:26:50 UTC
Per the proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jan/0245.html, the HTML A11Y TF does not plan to formally work on this issue at this time. This does not mean the TF has no interest in it, but does not have immediate plans to work on it. The TF may review the issue in the future.