15:02:36 RRSAgent has joined #lvtf 15:02:36 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/14-lvtf-irc 15:02:38 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:02:38 Zakim has joined #lvtf 15:02:40 Zakim, this will be 15:02:40 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 15:02:41 Meeting: Low Vision Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 15:02:41 Date: 14 July 2016 15:02:47 agenda+ Review: Techniques needed for Icon Fonts are there implications for LV users? 15:03:04 agenda+ 1100% https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-SC/issues/5 15:04:02 present+ Laura 15:04:17 +AWK 15:04:23 Zakim, who is on the phone? 15:04:23 Present: Laura, AWK 15:04:29 +Wayne 15:04:39 +ScottM 15:04:44 Scribe List: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Scribe_List 15:05:41 Ad hoc discussion of AAA-level items. 15:05:59 Scott: thinks that people will freak out with 1100% 15:06:41 scribe, wayne 15:06:52 Scribe: Laura 15:06:57 Thanks Laura 15:07:40 Zakim, take up item 2 15:07:40 agendum 2. "1100% https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-SC/issues/5" taken up [from AWK] 15:08:38 AWK: Scott thinks people will freak out at 1100% 15:09:15 AWK: May push this into silver if we push to UA 15:09:32 Scott: has suggested language. 15:10:46 From Scott's email: 5.Text can be resized without assistive technology @@at least@@ 200 percent in a way that does not require the user to scroll horizontally to read a line of text 15:10:54 … Text can be resized without assistive technology @@at least@@ 200 percent in a way that does not require the user to scroll horizontally to read a line of text 15:12:29 existing: 1.4.4 Resize text: Except for captions and images of text, text can be resized without assistive technology up to 200 percent without loss of content or functionality. (Level AA) 15:12:35 AWK: people may only do the minimum requirement then. 15:14:09 Scott: just text resize can cause problems on and off the web. 15:14:33 …we have to look at seniors. 15:15:16 …they have hard time with a computer let alone AT 15:15:58 …We maybe should take a flexible approach. 15:16:26 …so people don’t lock in on values. 15:16:41 AWK suggests: text can be resized without assistive technology up to the magnification level supported by the user agent without requiring horizontal scrolling. 15:16:43 …will get push back on 1100. 15:17:31 [ data point: quick check of default zoom maximums: Chrome 500%, FireFox 300%, IE 1000% ] 15:17:36 AWK: suggests “text can be resized without assistive technology up to the magnification level supported by the user agent without requiring horizontal scrolling.” 15:17:45 Firefox can go above 300% 15:18:27 Wayne: until now, wasn't the opportunity to look at the full screen. 15:19:16 …we can fit more now with rewrap 15:19:54 …we have the opportunity to introduce a new technique. 15:20:24 …what we have now is not working. 15:21:10 … what we need is 10 to 15 char per screen. 15:22:06 …we know that we can linearize content. 15:22:35 …unless someone adds a barrier 15:23:20 [ /me plays with bbc.com at 1000% magnification... impressive!] 15:23:45 AWK: what is the solution for the language. 15:25:01 Wayne: think of the page as a grid. At 10 and 15 em words don’t break. 15:25:54 …legge fond he could do 1000% on and ipad 15:26:25 …em unit is the most useful measure. 15:26:46 …page should be an em grid. 15:27:48 …linearized by block units and reflow is the key. 15:27:58 Scott: zoom text does this. 15:28:23 …all of the SCs need to work together. 15:29:31 …agree it would be awesome. But need to coordinate the SCs. 15:31:29 Wayne: if all the items on the page are linarized by block it will work. 15:32:15 Scott: problem is designers lock things down. 15:33:32 …do we make this part of a wider solution? 15:34:25 …if so how do we change the other SCs to coordinate them. 15:35:24 …we would need to rework 148 entirely. 15:35:48 AWK: Maybe not as this is under discussion. 15:36:08 …need to figure out at the WG level. 15:36:34 q+ to suggest focus on ideal SC for now, then synch with WCAG 2.1 15:37:08 AWK: don’t think we can use em units. 15:37:27 …does it work for every thing? 15:37:34 Shawn: yes. 15:38:07 s/yes./yes, for any text there is an em width 15:38:23 …thinking about WCAG to ACT docs. 15:38:30 ack s 15:38:30 shawn, you wanted to suggest focus on ideal SC for now, then synch with WCAG 2.1 15:38:31 ack me 15:38:54 Shawn: suggest focus on ideal SC for now, then synch with WCAG 2.1 15:39:17 AWK: Sure 15:40:52 Wayne: one column, rewrapped, linearization are needed. 15:43:34 Scott: Design requirements may cause people to freak out. 15:44:06 …may affect fucntionality. 15:44:41 …can’t use em units. 15:45:09 q? 15:45:21 q+ 15:45:25 q+ 15:45:34 Chair: AWK 15:45:34 …many people will not create their own style sheet. 15:45:50 q+ to say "blocks of text" so not forms, whole tables, maps, game labels, etc. (and disagree that can't use ems because users don't know them (although not necessarily advocating for ems - just saying:)) 15:46:01 ack AWK 15:46:47 +1 for wrap / hyphenate 15:47:19 AWK: to wayne if you zoom in a lot, linearization would work and wrap. 15:47:28 Wayne: yes. 15:47:42 ack way 15:48:34 …would need to break word for 2.1. and hyphenation for silver. 15:48:59 …users wouldn’t be writing style sheets. 15:49:41 q+ to ask wayne if the browser add-on he describes is an AT 15:49:43 …an browser add-on would do it. 15:49:53 …it can be done. 15:50:20 …need a user profile. 15:50:37 …AT style sheets written by pros. 15:52:10 …we are talking about making base leve accessibility. 15:52:55 …450% may be enough to get developers attention. 15:53:03 ack s 15:53:03 shawn, you wanted to say "blocks of text" so not forms, whole tables, maps, game labels, etc. (and disagree that can't use ems because users don't know them (although not 15:53:04 ack me 15:53:07 ... necessarily advocating for ems - just saying:)) 15:53:48 Shawn: We are talking about "blocks of text”. 15:54:34 ack awk 15:54:34 AWK, you wanted to ask wayne if the browser add-on he describes is an AT 15:54:40 …it isnt a requirement that users know em units. 15:57:12 Users can resize text up to the uper limit of the user agent 15:57:31 AWK: Would like to see in silver. Text can be resized without assistive technology up to the magnification level supported by the user agent without requiring horizontal scrolling. 15:57:52 …flexibility is what we want to focus on. 15:58:29 …picking a number is problematic. 16:00:30 wayne: agrees with AWK. 16:01:32 wayne: How do we do it. Does it go in silver? 16:03:09 …if pages were buit with progressive enhancement that would help. 16:04:18 …example of a barrier: Max set to 1 in the head. 16:06:18 AWK: If we go with ext can be resized without assistive technology up to the magnification level supported by the user agent without requiring horizontal scrolling. what are the repercussions? 16:06:36 …anything scanned wouldn’t pass. 16:07:11 SLH: if XYZ UA only provides 150%? 16:07:56 Shawn: What is a browser only provides 150% zoom? 16:11:34 AWK: policy makers can put in exceptions for scanned docs. 16:12:53 Wayne: we need another SC for barriers for writing ATs 16:13:41 AWK: Don’t think we can. 16:13:55 If we do our job correctly we will reduce the need for AT 16:14:51 …Should we work on this in Github? 16:15:02 wayne: yes. 16:15:53 Wayne will work on detailing what the barriers are in creating a browser extension for text enlargement and will add to the github disussion 16:16:20 AWK will add the magnification SC suggestion to the gitHub discussion for comment 16:16:39 Zakim, take up item 1 16:16:39 agendum 1. "Review: Techniques needed for Icon Fonts are there implications for LV users?" taken up [from AWK] 16:17:07 ACTION: Wayne to work on detailing what the barriers are in creating a browser extension for text enlargement and will add to the github disussion 16:17:07 Created ACTION-68 - Work on detailing what the barriers are in creating a browser extension for text enlargement and will add to the github disussion [on Wayne Dick - due 2016-07-21]. 16:17:25 Ugh..... 16:18:54 scott: has have long dicussions on icon fonts. Scales well. But don’t work well with screen reades and zoom text. 16:19:06 …becomes black boxes. 16:20:16 …am not a fan of them. 16:20:26 q+ to ask if icon fonts currently pass WCAG 2.0 16:20:50 Actually not black boxes. They are boxes with the unicode number inside. It takes lots of mag to see it. 16:21:26 …efficiency is rationale for using them. 16:22:01 …don't affect low vision specifically. 16:23:23 AWK: Do we need to have something that addresses this. 16:23:28 Example to try: http://timepiece.inostudio.de 16:24:03 AWK: works in Screen readers. 16:24:58 AWK: seems that much of the problem can be dealt with in WCAG 2.0 Techs and understanding documentation 16:25:04 Laura made 4 techniques 16:25:09 need review 16:25:23 .Using aria-hidden="true" on an icon font that AT should ignore 16:25:31 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_aria-hidden%3Dtrue_on_an_icon_font_that_AT_should_ignore 16:25:38 Icon Font with an On-Screen Text Alternative 16:25:51 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Icon_Font_with_an_On-Screen_Text_Alternative 16:26:04 Using aria-hidden="true" on Unicode characters that AT should ignore 16:26:11 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_a_Decorative_Unicode_Character 16:26:19 Unicode Character with an On-Screen Text Alternative 16:26:25 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Providing_an_On-Screen_Text_Alternative_for_an_Icon_Font 16:26:30 email discussion: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-tf/2016Jul/0035.html 16:28:30 Key problem is that icons presented with icon fonts are technically text but not regarded as such 16:28:40 needs to be clarified moving forward 16:30:08 Homework is to review Laura's documents 16:35:14 rrsagent, make minutes 16:35:14 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/14-lvtf-minutes.html laura 16:35:20 trackbot, end meeting 16:35:20 Zakim, list attendees 16:35:20 As of this point the attendees have been Laura, AWK, Wayne, ScottM 16:35:28 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 16:35:28 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/14-lvtf-minutes.html trackbot 16:35:29 RRSAgent, bye 16:35:29 I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/14-lvtf-actions.rdf : 16:35:29 ACTION: Wayne to work on detailing what the barriers are in creating a browser extension for text enlargement and will add to the github disussion [1] 16:35:29 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/14-lvtf-irc#T16-17-07