WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WCAG 2.0 SC 1.4.4 - Text Zoom Vs Browser Zoom

for

From: Rakesh P
Date: Sep 19, 2014 5:29AM

Dear All,

Thank you for your inputs.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On 9/17/14, Sean Curtis < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> Forgive me if I'm way off base here - I haven't read the entire
> conversation, but did you try specifying the height of the image backing the
> image map in EMs or REMs rather than pixels? Doing that should scale it with
> the text size increases as well as zooming.
>
> It might not be maintainable to do constantly unless you use JavaScript.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sean
>
>> On 17 Sep 2014, at 7:44 am, < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>>
>> Jared,
>>
>> I read through your comments on Alastairc article from 2013 where you very
>> clearly articulated an acceptable solution for text resizing:
>>
>> Level AA
>> - Zoom at 200%
>> - Text sizing at 150%
>>
>> Now, what authors of RWD website want to lean towards is if its RWD then
>> test for only text with zoom at 200% (no text resize) and for
>> non-responsive text resize at 200%.
>>
>> I find it hard ti digest that when designing for RWD wouldn't HTML/CSS
>> technologies provide support to resize text?
>>
>> Do you'll have examples of RWD sites that support text resize? I know
>> WCAG's S.C 1.4.4 accepts Page zoom but I cant and is true for most of us
>> as we believe Accessibility is about user and beyond guidelines.
>>
>> Pooja Nahata
>> Practice Lead - Accessibility CoE
>> Mobile: 1-623-419-3582 | 1-678-294-4742
>> Digital Accessibility Blog
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
>> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Detlev Fischer
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 1:06 PM
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] WCAG 2.0 SC 1.4.4 - Text Zoom Vs Browser Zoom
>>
>> Just to clarify, I was only answering Rakesh's initial question ("Is the
>> global zoom a sufficient way to execute and test S.C 1.4.4?") by rendering
>> what I believe is still the current WCAG working group position. And the
>> answer is: Yes, it is. But clearly, if it is possible to support text
>> resizing as well that would be better (it might be hard to implement in
>> the scenario Rakesh has described, though).
>>
>> I agree with Denis and Jared that it is good to support text resizing
>> wherever possible - I have seen that in many LV user tests now and have
>> argued in favour of making text-only resizing a WCAG requirement (but only
>> up to 150% - a position which is in synch with what Jared suggested in
>> "WCAG next"). The WCAG WG thought otherwise, and responsive web design and
>> the growth of the mobile web have changed the situation anyway (as
>> Alastair has pointed out).
>>
>> I have tried to render the entire argument about text and zoom resizing in
>> an article a while ago:
>>
>> "Text resizing: Why page zoom is not good enough - or is it?"
>> http://www.bitvtest.eu/articles/article/lesen/zoom-and-text-resizing.html
>>
>> Just for those who would enjoy a recap...
>>
>> Best,
>> Detlev
>>
>>> On 16 Sep 2014, at 18:25, "Stanzel, Susan - FSA, Kansas City, MO"
>>> < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Then for testing wouldn't we have to do both types of testing? I use
>>> JAWS, but we always have to give meaning to the images if it is more than
>>> decoration. It seems to me if the person can't enlarge the image
>>> something will be missed.
>>>
>>> Susie
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Lewis
>>> Phillips
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 10:57 AM
>>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>>> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] WCAG 2.0 SC 1.4.4 - Text Zoom Vs Browser Zoom
>>>
>>> Susie,
>>>
>>> Text zoom only increases the text size and doesn't change the image size.
>>> If there is an important information in the image (text, chart) this is
>>> not enlarged with text zoom.
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Stanzel, Susan - FSA, Kansas City, MO
>>>> < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What does text zoom do to the images on the page which could be
>>>> important?
>>>>
>>>> Susie Stanzel
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto:
>>>> <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Karl Groves
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 10:06 AM
>>>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>>>> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] WCAG 2.0 SC 1.4.4 - Text Zoom Vs Browser Zoom
>>>>
>>>> Rakesh,
>>>>
>>>> You might want to take a look at prior conversations on this list and
>>>> the WAI-IG list, as I recall two pretty informative discussions on this
>>>> topic.
>>>>
>>>> Also, this comprehensive post by Denis Boudreau
>>>> http://www.denisboudreau.org/blog/2013/07/why-browser-zoom-testing-su
>>>> c
>>>> ks-for-accessibility/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 4:24 AM, Rakesh P < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>
>>>>> We have a web application where content on the site is getting
>>>>> restructured if we use global zoom to magnify the content.
>>>>> In one of the page, there is a chart image with image hot spots
>>>>> (functional links) as indicator of some chart value. When we do
>>>>> global zoom, the entire chart (with image hot shots) is getting
>>>>> re-sized and no distortion is happening. But with Text Zoom (using
>>>>> Text Zoom option in Firefox browser), only the text is re-sizing and
>>>>> not the chart image, so the position of image hot spots are getting
>>>>> distorted and this will definitely create some difficulty for user
>>>>> using text zoom (low vision user).
>>>>> As per WCAG SC 1.4.4 (Text Re-size), the content of the page should
>>>>> not be clipped, truncated or obscured with 200% Text Zoom.
>>>>> We want to understand, in a scenario like this, where Global Zoom is
>>>>> handled efficiently and doesn't cause any loss of information or
>>>>> horizontal scroll, is it really required to handle distortion caused
>>>>> by browser text zoom? Is the global zoom a sufficient way to execute
>>>>> and test S.C 1.4.4?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks & Regards
>>>>> Rakesh Paladugula
>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Karl Groves
>>>> www.karlgroves.com
>>>> @karlgroves
>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/karlgroves
>>>> Phone: +1 410.541.6829
>>>>
>>>> Modern Web Toolsets and Accessibility
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uq6Db47-Ks
>>>>
>>>> www.tenon.io
>>>> >>>> >>>> list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA
>>>> solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of
>>>> this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains
>>>> may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal
>>>> penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error,
>>>> please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.
>>>> >>>> >>>> list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>> >>> >>> list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>> >>> >>> list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>
>> --
>> Detlev Fischer
>> testkreis - das Accessibility-Team von feld.wald.wiese c/o feld.wald.wiese
>> Thedestraße 2
>> 22767 Hamburg
>>
>> Tel +49 (0)40 439 10 68-3
>> Mobil +49 (0)1577 170 73 84
>> Fax +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5
>>
>> http://www.testkreis.de
>> Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> >> messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the
>> intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
>> information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please reply to the
>> sender and destroy all copies of the original message. Any unauthorized
>> review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of
>> this email, and/or any action taken in reliance on the contents of this
>> e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Where permitted by
>> applicable law, this e-mail and other e-mail communications sent to and
>> from Cognizant e-mail addresses may be monitored.
>> >> >> > > > >