W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire WCAG2ICT-Review proposed update to non-web document note for SC 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum)

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email address: maryjom@us.ibm.com

This questionnaire was open from 2023-06-19 to 2023-06-28.

9 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

Success Criterion 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) - Review potential update do note for non-web documents

1. Success Criterion 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) - Review potential update do note for non-web documents

There is a proposed update to the guidance we have in the editor's draft for SC 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum), specifically on the note for non-text documents.

The original note we have is:

(for non-web documents)

NOTE: Some document formats do not have a default zoom level, but have commonly available user agents that allow users to view the content at a wide range of sizes. When evaluating such documents, it is a best practice to choose a starting zoom level appropriate for the intended usage of the content.

The proposed update to the note is:

(for non-web documents)

NOTE: Some document formats are designed to be viewed at a wide range of zoom levels provided by the user agent, but the commonly available user agents for the format do not provide a consistent base zoom level from which to evaluate this criterion. For such documents it is a best practice to evaluate target sizes at a zoom level where the purpose of the targets is visually understandable.

For reference, here is a link to the full text of the Guidance When Applying Success Criterion 2.5.8 to Non-Web Documents and Software as it is today in the editor's draft.

Indicate your preference, and if further changes are needed.

Summary

Choice	All responders
Choice	Results
Prefer existing note, as-is.
Prefer the updated note, as is.	4
Prefer existing note, with changes.
Prefer the updated note, with changes.	5
Something else. Provide details and /or alternate proposal.

Details

Responder	Success Criterion 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) - Review potential update do note for non-web documents	Comments
Chris Loiselle	Prefer the updated note, as is.
Olivia Hogan-Stark	Prefer the updated note, with changes.	Some take-or-leave changes I'd make to the first sentence (I'd break into two sentences). Mostly having an issue with the last sentence. "Some document formats are designed for viewing at a wide range of zoom levels provided by the user agent. However, the commonly available user agents for these formats lack a consistent base zoom level from which to evaluate this criterion. In such instances, it is considered a best practice to evaluate target sizes starting at a zoom level that aligns with the intended usage of the content."
Fernanda Bonnin	Prefer the updated note, as is.	also like Olivia's proposed changes to the updated note
Mitchell Evan	Prefer the updated note, as is.	I don't love either version, but we need something beyond just "applies as written." The following might help - "Some document formats, such as PDF" - but is it okay to pick on just one technology? I also like Olivia's edit.
Mary Jo Mueller	Prefer the updated note, with changes.	Olivia's edit with the addition of "may" in the 2nd sentence. This won't necessarily always be the case, so "may" gives needed wiggle room. Some document formats are designed for viewing at a wide range of zoom levels provided by the user agent. However, the commonly available user agents for these formats may lack a consistent base zoom level from which to evaluate this criterion. In such instances, it is considered a best practice to evaluate target sizes starting at a zoom level that aligns with the intended usage of the content.
Bruce Bailey	Prefer the updated note, with changes.	Suggest deleting "it is a best practice to" from last sentence in. That sentence would then be: For such documents, evaluate target sizes at a zoom level where the purpose of the targets is visually understandable.
Thorsten Katzmann	Prefer the updated note, with changes.	I prefer Olivia's suggestion with "may" and deletion of "it is a best practice to".
Mike Pluke	Prefer the updated note, with changes.	I also prefer Olivia's suggestion with "may" and deletion of "it is a best practice to" - the wonders of iterative commenting :-).
Loïc Martínez Normand	Prefer the updated note, as is.