Edit comment LC-659 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-1304 Next: LC-1151

Comment LC-659: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> on behalf of NA; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Resolution status:
Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter; Response status:
No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):; Comment:
Part of Item:
Comment Type: GE
Comment (including rationale for proposed change):

Guideline 1.4 is the only part of the whole document I was able to find that addresses any component of the most basic element of accessibility to any non-blind user attempting access entirely visually: legibility. Thus legibility coverage appears to be inadequate, making the entire document inadequate.

If text content cannot be read at or all without pain, it is functionally inaccessible. Nothing else matters when the content cannot be read. Other very important criteria factor heavily in determining basic legibility in addition to the guideline 1.4 coverage:

1-font size
2-font family

Reduction of font size from the user preferred size, and substitution of an author chosen font family for a user preferred font family, both cause a reduction in legibility, and thus a reduction in accessibility.

The primary message from http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/font-size is hereby incorporated by reference, and should be a part of the guideline. Additionally, please digest http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/accessibility.html for more detail and background on legibility as relates to accessibility.

Proposed Change:

Legibility is so fundamental a component of accessibility that it demands its own subpart, with the current 1.4 a component thereof. The guideline in addition to the current 1.4 should spell out:

1-Avoid font size reduction from the user preference for primary (e.g. centrally located paragraph text) content. Never size text in px or any absolute unit.
2-Minimize font size reduction from the user preference for secondary content.
3-Use utmost care, preferably avoid entirely, substituting any font family for the user\'s preferred font family for primary content. Font family substitution should be limited to branding and secondary content.
4-Only users are in position to suitably determine the font size and font family required to provide adequate legibility.
5-Not all users are empowered to compensate, either at all or to sufficient degree, when authors deviate from these guidelines. (e.g., users of computers situated in public libraries or kiosks); Related issues: 469
(space separated ids); WG Notes: [TEAMB] Discussed 06 July 2006 resolution: put LC-659 on hold to be addressed with other font legibility issues http://www.w3.org/2006/07/06-wai-wcag-minutes.html Discussed in the 25 January 2007 telecon: accepted by unanimous consent http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/01/25-wai-wcag-minutes.html {accept}; Resolution: Although text resizing and other font configurations such as font family are primarily user agent functions, we have added new success criteria to address the author's responsibility: Level AA: Visually rendered text can be resized without assistive technology up to 200 percent and down to 50 percent without loss of content or functionality. Level AAA: Visually rendered text can be resized without assistive technology up to 200 percent and down to 50 percent without loss of content or functionality and in a way that does not require the user to scroll horizontally.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)