IRC log of ag on 2017-05-16

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:59:54 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ag
12:59:54 [RRSAgent]
logging to
12:59:56 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
12:59:56 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ag
12:59:58 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
12:59:58 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
12:59:59 [trackbot]
Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
12:59:59 [trackbot]
Date: 16 May 2017
13:00:06 [AWK]
zakim, who is on the phone?
13:00:06 [Zakim]
Present: (no one)
13:00:08 [AWK]
13:00:12 [AWK]
Chair: AWK
13:00:15 [AWK]
zakim, agenda?
13:00:15 [Zakim]
I see nothing on the agenda
13:00:38 [AWK]
agenda+ Resize Content:
13:00:47 [AWK]
agenda+ Plain Language:
13:00:58 [AWK]
agenda+ Target Size:
13:01:40 [AWK]
Scribe: Mike_Pluke
14:31:32 [Greg]
Greg has joined #ag
14:48:22 [marcjohlic]
marcjohlic has joined #ag
14:53:56 [Wilco]
Wilco has joined #AG
14:54:19 [AWK]
AWK has joined #ag
14:54:24 [AWK]
Zakim, agenda?
14:54:24 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
14:54:25 [Zakim]
1. Resize Content: [from AWK]
14:54:25 [Zakim]
2. Plain Language: [from AWK]
14:54:25 [Zakim]
3. Target Size: [from AWK]
14:54:33 [AWK]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:54:34 [Zakim]
Present: AWK
14:56:23 [laura]
laura has joined #ag
14:57:22 [MelanieP]
MelanieP has joined #ag
14:57:22 [AWK]
regrets+ Makoto, Lauriat, Glenda, Pietro
14:57:54 [JakeAbma]
JakeAbma has joined #ag
14:58:26 [alastairc]
alastairc has joined #ag
14:58:32 [JakeAbma]
present+ JakeAbma
14:59:17 [lisa]
what is the password again ?
14:59:21 [lisa]
for the webex
15:00:01 [gowerm]
gowerm has joined #ag
15:00:13 [laura]
present+ Laura
15:00:41 [Detlev]
Detlev has joined #ag
15:01:00 [lisa]
thank u
15:01:10 [alastairc]
present+ alastairc
15:01:12 [ChrisLoiselle]
ChrisLoiselle has joined #ag
15:01:27 [gowerm]
present+ MikeGower
15:01:27 [KimD]
KimD has joined #ag
15:01:34 [Bruce_Bailey]
Bruce_Bailey has joined #ag
15:02:23 [Bruce_Bailey]
present+ Bruce_Bailey
15:02:31 [gowerm]
That's mike gower actually
15:02:34 [MelanieP]
present+ MelanieP
15:02:37 [Kathy]
Kathy has joined #ag
15:02:51 [maryjom]
maryjom has joined #ag
15:02:53 [Rachael]
Rachael has joined #ag
15:02:53 [Detlev]
present+ Detlev
15:03:06 [maryjom]
present+ MaryJoMueller
15:03:16 [marcjohlic]
present+ marcjohlic
15:03:30 [jon_avila]
jon_avila has joined #ag
15:03:31 [Mike_Pluke]
Mike_Pluke has joined #ag
15:03:36 [Rachael]
present+ Rachael
15:03:54 [ChrisLoiselle]
15:04:05 [Alex_and_Crystal]
Alex_and_Crystal has joined #ag
15:04:30 [KimD]
Present+ KimD
15:04:46 [Mike_Pluke]
yes, but can't find the webex password
15:04:58 [Ryladog]
Ryladog has joined #ag
15:05:12 [Mike_Pluke]
Sorry thought it had changed
15:05:25 [Mike_Elledge]
Mike_Elledge has joined #ag
15:05:29 [Ryladog]
Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
15:05:29 [AWK]
Zakim, ping me in 25 minutes
15:05:29 [Zakim]
ok, AWK
15:05:33 [Mike_Elledge]
Present+ Mike Elledge
15:05:52 [Mike_Pluke]
present+ Mike Pluke
15:06:07 [kirkwood_]
kirkwood_ has joined #AG
15:06:32 [davidmacdonald]
davidmacdonald has joined #ag
15:06:37 [Mike_Pluke]
Currently no consensus in surveys
15:07:07 [Mike_Pluke]
zakim, takeup next item
15:07:07 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'takeup next item', Mike_Pluke
15:07:22 [Mike_Pluke]
]zakim, next item
15:07:38 [Mike_Pluke]
zakim , next item
15:07:42 [AWK]
zakim, next item
15:07:43 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Resize Content:" taken up [from AWK]
15:08:01 [Crystal_Jones]
Crystal_Jones has joined #ag
15:08:51 [Alex_and_Crystal]
15:08:55 [steverep]
steverep has joined #ag
15:09:05 [steverep]
15:09:22 [Mike_Pluke]
Good results from the Resize Content survey - 8 ready to go
15:09:23 [kirkwood]
kirkwood has joined #ag
15:09:56 [Greg]
present+ Greg_Lowney
15:10:04 [MichaelC]
15:10:11 [Mike_Pluke]
David's OK with going live with 400% even though he'd be happier with 300%
15:11:07 [kirkwood]
present+ kirkwood
15:11:25 [alastairc]
15:11:52 [JF]
JF has joined #ag
15:11:54 [Mike_Pluke]
Kim felt that her company would not meet 400% without scrolling. They might have to opt out of 2.1
15:11:56 [MichaelC]
15:12:05 [davidmacdonald]
mike can you mute
15:12:20 [MichaelC]
q+ to say we should think of the ¨major reno¨ approach to policy targets
15:13:00 [adam_solomon]
adam_solomon has joined #ag
15:13:03 [Mike_Pluke]
Kim's still OK with going ahead with this as it is not impossible
15:13:17 [adam_solomon]
present+ adam_solomon
15:14:47 [Mike_Pluke]
Detlev shares Greg's thoughts on lowering the bar for text that is already large. Fears that there might be some push back as it will be very hard to meet.
15:15:22 [alastairc]
q+ to talk about this
15:15:41 [JF]
present+ JF
15:15:48 [Mike_Pluke]
LV TF's proposals started at 1600%, so already signiticantly down from that.
15:16:52 [Mike_Pluke]
Michael Gower's comments raised concern regarding mobile.
15:17:31 [Mike_Pluke]
Michael also sees no benefit in being A rather than AA as everyone uses A and AA and not just A
15:17:56 [Ryladog]
15:18:22 [kirkwood]
+1 to reflow ability
15:18:25 [jon_avila]
It is possible to reflow but not allow resize up to 400%
15:18:49 [jamesn]
jamesn has joined #ag
15:19:35 [Mike_Pluke]
Mike Gower asked What would we lose if this only specified text.
15:20:21 [jamesn]
15:20:48 [Mike_Pluke]
Stephen Repsher's comment reference to "conflicts" related to SCs that refer to 200%
15:21:00 [jasonjgw]
15:21:41 [Mike_Pluke]
Mike Elledge realised that he was confused between resizing text at AA and content at 400% - seems to be in conflict
15:22:15 [AWK]
ack alex
15:22:29 [Greg]
q+ to go over my survey comments
15:22:41 [AWK]
=== what is a fixed spatial layout?
15:23:17 [jon_avila]
The menu could collapse and expand
15:24:01 [Mike_Pluke]
Alex asked questions related to horizontal menu bar or ribbon at the top
15:24:27 [Greg]
Alex, I would suggest menu bars wrap to multiple lines, like other content.
15:24:58 [AWK]
ack ala
15:24:58 [Zakim]
alastairc, you wanted to talk about this
15:25:00 [Mike_Pluke]
Andrew is after an answer to what is a "fixed spatial layout" referred to in Alex's question
15:25:43 [gowerm]
+1 agreed: going above 200%, it really doesn't matter what the target is.
15:26:14 [Mike_Pluke]
Alistair concludes that if you go beyond 200% it doesn't matter much if you go to 300% or 400%. 400% difference between old iPhones and a laptop.
15:26:57 [Mike_Pluke]
Linearization to help LV users who tend to override layouts.
15:28:10 [Mike_Pluke]
Alistair discussed A versus AA. Confusing because of not wanting to change the current SC. Lose any 2-d information when linearization.
15:28:59 [Mike_Pluke]
The current resize text SC is a good fallback for things that go in the exception.
15:29:34 [Mike_Pluke]
Making one a higher level than the other would mean re-writing the existing one.
15:29:55 [Mike_Pluke]
The 400% is easier to test than tests related to reflow.
15:30:11 [AWK]
agenda+ ACT TF Update
15:30:27 [Mike_Pluke]
Dispute over whether responsive content sites lose content when reflowed.
15:30:31 [Zakim]
AWK, you asked to be pinged at this time
15:31:15 [Mike_Pluke]
Decided that adding an exception for mobile is not related to the content.
15:32:27 [AWK]
=== Alex also concerned about wide menubar paradigm in this case
15:32:29 [Mike_Pluke]
Alex felt that his answer related to what constitutes a fixed layout has not been answered.
15:32:49 [AWK]
ack michaelc
15:32:50 [Zakim]
MichaelC, you wanted to say we should think of the ¨major reno¨ approach to policy targets
15:33:24 [alastairc]
@alex_and_crystal Have you read the 'intial responses' here?
15:33:52 [AWK]
ack ry
15:34:13 [Mike_Pluke]
Michael C: Shouldn't use implementability on retrofit as a criteria for rejection?
15:34:25 [KimD]
*thanks MichaelC for the clarification about retrofitting v new dev
15:34:25 [jon_avila]
Electronic Health Records requires on Level A in the US
15:34:36 [jon_avila]
15:34:45 [Alex_and_Crystal]
@alastairc, no I have not read it. But how does that address the questions?
15:34:53 [jon_avila]
until 2021
15:35:14 [AWK]
ack jasongw
15:35:17 [alastairc]
@alex_and_crystal See the bit starting: The "fixed spatial layout" does need better definition and examples (in the understanding document), which would include:
15:35:22 [Mike_Pluke]
Canada is not yet AA, but will be by 2021.
15:36:10 [Bruce_Bailey]
Ontario started with Single A though, yes?
15:36:20 [AWK]
ack greg
15:36:20 [Zakim]
Greg, you wanted to go over my survey comments
15:36:35 [Mike_Pluke]
Jason suggests that 2.1 may be a standard for new or substantially re-written content.
15:36:40 [gowerm]
And remember that that is WCAG 2.0 targets. If we made Resize Text A for 2.1, that would not affect any jurisdictions current guidance
15:37:06 [Bruce_Bailey]
There are a few real-world example that demonstrate that Level A and Level AA are being used separately
15:37:32 [Mike_Pluke]
Greg Lowney re his comments: Agrees with Alex that more difficult for sights that already have large text - maybe an exception is required.
15:37:48 [jamesn]
how about zoom until your text is 64px size (for example)
15:37:50 [gowerm]
@Bruce_Bailey, agreed, but again, those are WCAG 2.0. If we move something in 2.1, that doesn't affect any current jurisdiction
15:38:00 [AWK]
AWK: for a wide menu I'll add that the developer would have a variety of options, from adding a single menu button that then exposes the list of top-level menu items, to adding a "more"-type icon to show the next set of menu items, to wrapping the menu.
15:38:21 [Mike_Pluke]
Greg Lowney: The role of native controls. The content of a field may be wider than the visible screen and may need scrolling.
15:38:46 [adam_solomon]
15:39:04 [AWK]
=== what is the role of the UA for web content? Implication for mobile UA....
15:39:14 [Mike_Pluke]
Greg wanted Clarification on the role of web-based user agents. Clarify what is required of them.
15:39:37 [Mike_Pluke]
zakim , next item
15:39:46 [Alex_and_Crystal]
@alastairc, thanks for that. I am looking for something along this line. Of course, we need definition text, not just examples.
15:39:48 [AWK]
zakim, clear queue
15:39:48 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'clear queue', AWK
15:39:48 [adam_solomon]
native controls should come under the exception of spatial layout
15:39:54 [alastairc]
Just to note, I've answered most things, but I do need to go back and address comments from Greg (Lowney) and JakeAbma
15:40:02 [adam_solomon]
15:40:07 [AWK]
ack ja
15:40:18 [AWK]
RESOLUTION: Leave open
15:40:26 [Mike_Pluke]
zakim, next item
15:40:26 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Plain Language:" taken up [from AWK]
15:40:30 [Greg]
See my my survey comments for more details.
15:40:32 [alastairc]
@Alex_and_Crystal sure, does that need to be in the SC text or understanding?
15:41:11 [Bruce_Bailey]
@gowerm, I am just saying it feels premature to me to give up on A/AA/AAA for 2.1 at the moment...
15:41:11 [Alex_and_Crystal]
@alastairc, either in sc text or definition
15:41:34 [allanj]
allanj has joined #ag
15:42:04 [AWK]
zakim, ping me in 25 minutes
15:42:04 [Zakim]
ok, AWK
15:42:33 [Mike_Pluke]
Laura's question about who is going to maintain the 1500 word vocabulary
15:43:11 [JF]
Q+ to ask "In the public" how? where? in what format?
15:43:24 [Mike_Pluke]
Lisa: The answer is that the 1500 word list has to be publicly listed.
15:45:28 [Mike_Pluke]
A lot of concerns over the 1500 word concept - either not enough compared to say what WCAG has
15:45:47 [Ryladog]
15:46:03 [lisa]
15:46:17 [Mike_Pluke]
Lisa says that all comments have been dealt with, but Andrew suggested that ongoing comments suggest that this has not been fully resolved.
15:47:19 [Alex_and_Crystal]
Is 1500 a number derived from research & which language?
15:47:30 [AWK]
ack JF
15:47:30 [Zakim]
JF, you wanted to ask "In the public" how? where? in what format?
15:47:57 [Mike_Pluke]
Stephen Repsher wants to see at least something in the normative test about where the list comes from
15:47:57 [Bruce_Bailey]
q+ to ask where 1500 came from
15:48:09 [Ryladog]
15:48:10 [AWK]
ack r
15:48:57 [lisa]
all non testable
15:49:35 [AWK]
ack li
15:49:37 [Mike_Pluke]
Katie suggests that having a summary and a link
15:49:49 [AWK]
ack bru
15:49:49 [Zakim]
Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to ask where 1500 came from
15:49:55 [jasonjgw]
15:50:10 [lisa]
15:51:01 [gowerm]
15:51:14 [lisa]
there are brudcasting program tha do that too
15:51:18 [AWK]
ack jason
15:51:26 [Mike_Pluke]
Bruce wonders where the 1500 number came from (could be smaller or much larger). Some books provide a list of words used at the end (maybe an approach).
15:52:28 [JF]
+1 to Jason
15:52:56 [adam_solomon]
15:53:23 [AWK]
ack lisa
15:53:26 [Bruce_Bailey]
I would like to know if it is allowed for the content author provide the list of 1500 words they used.
15:53:41 [Mike_Pluke]
Jason Concerns about internationalization because of lack of word lists in different languages. Different vocabularies used in each language. Also still issues with different application domains.
15:54:54 [Mike_Pluke]
Lisa suggests that if we don't get the word list idea in, there won't be a significant benefit for many users.
15:55:16 [Alex_and_Crystal]
15:55:45 [Bruce_Bailey]
q+ to ask again where 1500 came from. Why not 2000? Why not 2500?
15:56:38 [Bruce_Bailey]
15:56:40 [Mike_Pluke]
Lisa suggests that need to separate concerns regarding how the word list concept can be implemented versus those that think that there is no value in the concept at all
15:57:29 [jon_avila]
seems like instructions would include words like checkbox, radio button, button, drop down. So we'd need to make sure common core words include all control names.
15:58:24 [Mike_Pluke]
Lisa argued that after 1500 words, the extra words are relatively obscure. Should allow general communication with this number of words. Additional context specific word lists can be added to this.
15:59:57 [Detlev]
16:00:05 [Bruce_Bailey]
Here is an example of ten hundred words in English:
16:00:07 [Bruce_Bailey]
16:00:07 [AWK]
ack gower
16:00:20 [Alex_and_Crystal]
Is it just me or did the audio dropped?
16:00:42 [lisa]
just you
16:01:18 [gowerm]
3.1.5 Reading Level: When text requires reading ability more advanced than the lower secondary education level after removal of proper names and titles, supplemental content, or a version that does not require reading ability more advanced than the lower secondary education level, is available. (Level AAA)
16:01:29 [lisa]
reading level is not helpful
16:02:08 [AWK]
ack adam
16:02:10 [lisa]
also does not work internationaly
16:02:24 [Mike_Pluke]
Mike Gower thinks that this is an important topic. Wondered how Headings and Labels is of a similar level of generality compared to other SCs got into WCAG 2.0.
16:02:32 [Mike_Pluke]
Also questions why reading-level could not be used - never heard the full rationale against.
16:02:33 [lisa]
words can be easy to read and not simple, such as the word "mode"
16:02:34 [gowerm]
"Reading level is not helpful" is not a helpful explanation
16:02:59 [gowerm]
right, and "mode" at a elementary school level would not be on the list
16:03:11 [Mike_Pluke]
Adam solomon that the 1500 word list would come from the body acquiring the system.
16:04:22 [AWK]
=== concern about internationalization - do we know?
16:04:24 [Mike_Pluke]
Question to Lisa - is this cross-language threshold?
16:04:45 [Ryladog]
Interesting comment from Adam Solomon: "that the 1500 word list would come from the body acquiring the system."
16:06:07 [Mike_Pluke]
Would it be possible to raise the language a bit for any languages where it might 1500 words might not be appropriate (e.g. to 1600/1700)
16:06:33 [Bruce_Bailey]
Maybe OT, but here is the Saturn V rocket explained with ten hundred words:
16:06:36 [AWK]
16:06:37 [Bruce_Bailey]
16:06:41 [AWK]
ack alex
16:06:44 [Mike_Pluke]
English, Hebrew and Arabic are languages that have been considered.
16:06:56 [gowerm]
@lisa This is the note from Reading Level. "According to the Open Society Mental Health Initiative, the concept of Easy to Read cannot be universal, and it will not be possible to write a text that will suit the abilities of all people with literacy and comprehension problems. Using the clearest and simplest language appropriate is highly desirable, but the WCAG Working Group could not find...
16:06:57 [gowerm]
...a way to test whether this had been achieved. The use of reading level is a way to introduce testability into a Success Criterion that encourages clear writing. Supplementary content can be a powerful technique for people with some classes of cognitive disability. "
16:07:04 [Zakim]
AWK, you asked to be pinged at this time
16:07:45 [lisa]
that is why we have a scope
16:08:04 [Mike_Pluke]
Alex - a hammer looking for a nail situation. Comprehension is a complex issue - every time you draw a line there is a significant cost to things like freedom of speech.
16:08:20 [lisa]
16:08:26 [AWK]
=== should this be a personalization issue instead of a defined threshold?
16:08:59 [Detlev]
16:09:02 [laura]
SC is scoped to: error messages that require a response to continue, instructions, labels and navigational elements
16:09:12 [Mike_Pluke]
Alex - ought to be a personalization issue - not convinced by the universality of the 1500 words limit.
16:09:23 [AWK]
ack li
16:09:59 [Mike_Pluke]
Scope doesn't make it a freedom of speech issue - e.g. for buttons, etc.
16:10:19 [gowerm]
don't know
16:10:36 [AWK]
Is there a chance of a 1500 word limit getting through?
16:10:41 [JF]
-1 (sorry)
16:10:50 [KimD]
-1 I cannot support the 1500 words at this time
16:10:57 [JakeAbma]
-1 for now
16:10:58 [Alex_and_Crystal]
16:10:58 [Bruce_Bailey]
+1 yes, with the edits I proposed in survey
16:11:01 [jamesn]
16:11:03 [AWK]
16:11:04 [Rachael]
16:11:05 [lisa]
also in the tecniques you can add it as an attribute fso you can use wnay text you like
16:11:06 [Kathy]
16:11:10 [gowerm]
0 still waiting
16:11:11 [Detlev]
16:11:13 [jon_avila]
16:11:18 [davidmacdonald]
In today's technology environment -1 Maybe in future
16:11:18 [Ryladog]
16:11:20 [Mike_Pluke]
16:11:36 [AWK]
RESOLUTION: leave open
16:11:47 [alastairc]
-1 at the moment, just not clear on who would be responsible for it.
16:12:00 [Mike_Elledge]
-1 I think it will rely too much on others creating controlled vocabularies :^ (
16:12:05 [AWK]
zakim, next item
16:12:05 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Target Size:" taken up [from AWK]
16:12:16 [Mike_Pluke]
zakim, next item
16:12:16 [Zakim]
agendum 3 was just opened, Mike_Pluke
16:12:32 [Kathy]
Several points of clarification: -Target does not mean size of the link or button. Can have padding or spacing around the interactive control for the touch target area -Increasing the touch target size, does not necessarily mean larger keyboard focus indicator – see Patrick's mock up- -Increasing target size to 44x44 CSS pixels can be accomplished using CSS using pointer events and does not require scripting
16:12:42 [Kathy]
16:13:12 [AWK]
16:13:56 [Mike_Pluke]
Kathy clarifying that 44 pixel does not mean the focus indicators etc. get bigger - just the target size
16:13:58 [jamesn]
16:14:47 [Mike_Pluke]
So really a CSS change to accomplish this. Proposals that should not just be links, so example also includes blocks of text
16:15:48 [davidmacdonald]
Option 1 +1 exception for links in blocks of text
16:15:55 [steverep]
q+ to correct that it is not guaranteed that the visual indicator does not expand
16:16:21 [AWK]
ack james
16:16:27 [Mike_Pluke]
3 options described
16:17:00 [Bruce_Bailey]
+1 for Option 1: Inline: The target is a text link in a block of text.
16:18:13 [Mike_Pluke]
James Nurthern can do padding using CSS only, but that is inflexible. If change extra size of the padding to suit the circumstances cannot be done entirely in CSS.
16:18:24 [JF]
native controls today (<button>, <select>, etc.) will all fail this SC out of the box
16:18:40 [AWK]
ack st
16:18:40 [Zakim]
steverep, you wanted to correct that it is not guaranteed that the visual indicator does not expand
16:18:42 [jamesn]
16:19:03 [Ryladog]
+1 for Option 1: Inline: The target is a text link in a block of text.
16:19:05 [Bruce_Bailey]
I don't object to exception for In-Page (The target is a text link where the destination is on the same page), but where did that come from?
16:19:10 [JF]
16:19:31 [Mike_Pluke]
Steve Repsher - visual focus indicator expands and overlaps the words?
16:19:35 [AWK]
ack JF
16:19:37 [Bruce_Bailey]
q+ to ask if full-screen interactives (every pixel is a touch point) fail this?
16:19:48 [jon_avila]
so it sounds like you are talking about NVDA's focus ring plug-in?
16:20:09 [Kathy]
yes I think it is NVDA focus ring
16:20:39 [Mike_Pluke]
John - if start doing reflow you will have 2 links overlapping, and the second link will overlap the first - making it much smaller such that it will fail
16:20:47 [jon_avila]
agree with John -- I think we should just exempt inline interactive content as z-index overlap will be issues
16:20:50 [AWK]
=== concern about overlapping items creating a smaller target for overlapped item
16:21:04 [AWK]
=== impact on native controls?
16:21:05 [AWK]
ack B
16:21:06 [Zakim]
Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to ask if full-screen interactives (every pixel is a touch point) fail this?
16:21:08 [Mike_Pluke]
John has real concerns that everything out there is going to fail
16:21:39 [Mike_Pluke]
Bruce - does something like Google maps will fail?
16:22:12 [Detlev]
Can we have a vote on acceptance of excluding targets in blocks of text?
16:22:16 [Alex_and_Crystal]
16:22:20 [Kathy]
Option 1: Inline: The target is a text link in a block of text. Option 2: Inline: The target is in a block of text.
16:22:27 [Mike_Pluke]
Kathy - No as the interactive targets are essential
16:23:01 [alastairc]
I'd prefer option 2, followed by 3.
16:23:03 [Mike_Pluke]
Not worrying about in-line items in a line of text is one possible exception.
16:23:11 [AWK]
ack al
16:23:46 [Mike_Pluke]
Alex - have you looked at a target that is not a square or rectangle and the spacing between targets?
16:24:00 [AWK]
=== question about non-square targets
16:24:24 [Mike_Pluke]
The studies done my the TF suggested that the actual target size is more important than the spacing
16:25:04 [AWK]
16:25:23 [jon_avila]
Perhaps a radius of 22 css pixels from a centroid
16:26:05 [jon_avila]
the finger contact though is translated as a point - so the shape of the finger is not relevant
16:26:14 [Mike_Pluke]
Looked at the industry standards and these were all looking at square targets. Alex was actually more concerned with non-rectangular targets such as a circle.
16:26:17 [Detlev]
16:27:25 [Alex_and_Crystal]
@jon_avila, but the accuracy changes over a radius, not square
16:27:37 [laura]
Spacing metrics in the Adapting text SC are currently: line spacing 1.5, letter spacing 0.12 em, word spacing 0.16 em.
16:29:09 [Mike_Pluke]
Kathy suggests a slider up the page may fall into the essential layout exception. Andrew concerned that this is a narrow control.
16:29:33 [AWK]
ack de
16:30:06 [laura]
may be some synergy between this SC and the adapting text SC.
16:30:14 [jon_avila]
agree with Detlev
16:30:22 [AWK]
Straw poll: Option 1: Inline: The target is a text link in a block of text. Option 2: Inline: The target is in a block of text. or 3=not sure/something else
16:30:22 [Mike_Pluke]
Detlev interested in thoughts on option 2 - to fully exclude targets in blocks of text
16:31:05 [Ryladog]
16:31:09 [Bruce_Bailey]
+1 to option 1
16:31:12 [gowerm]
Option 1 preferred. Can live with 2
16:31:16 [Detlev]
16:31:22 [jamesn]
16:31:25 [jon_avila]
16:31:26 [laura]
Option 1 preferred. Can live with 2
16:31:27 [KimD]
16:31:29 [Rachael]
16:31:29 [JakeAbma]
16:31:32 [jamesn]
(can live with 1 though)
16:31:36 [AWK]
16:31:42 [Rachael]
(also can live with 1)
16:31:50 [Ryladog]
I can live with2 also
16:31:51 [steverep]
2 (I think?)
16:31:54 [jasonjgw]
3 - I worry that the exceptions tend to cover too many of the cases where this will be a problem for users.
16:32:00 [Mike_Pluke]
16:32:06 [Bruce_Bailey]
Option 2 permits small gifs inline with text. Those seem problematic to me.
16:32:53 [AWK]
RESOLUTION: Leave open
16:33:03 [laura]
16:33:08 [Mike_Elledge]
Bye all
16:33:51 [Mike_Pluke]
trackbot, end meeting
16:33:51 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:33:51 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been AWK, JakeAbma, Laura, alastairc, MikeGower, Bruce_Bailey, MelanieP, Detlev, MaryJoMueller, marcjohlic, Rachael, ChrisLoiselle, KimD,
16:33:55 [Zakim]
... Katie_Haritos-Shea, Elledge, Pluke, steverep, Greg_Lowney, MichaelC, kirkwood, adam_solomon, JF, jamesn
16:33:59 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:33:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:34:00 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:34:00 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items