E-mail List Archives
Re: 200% website scaling
Date: Nov 29, 2019 12:56PM
- Next message: glen walker: "Re: 200% website scaling"
- Previous message: glen walker: "Re: 200% website scaling"
- Next message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: 200% website scaling"
- Previous message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: 200% website scaling"
- View all messages in this Thread
Id interpreted 1.4.4. as:
a) Avoid horizontal scrolling for text (i.e. access reflow if possible).
b) Dont cause overlapping up to 200% scaling.
Are there any further issues imaginable? Help me, if Im wrong.
And what is substantially new in 1.4.10 more than the exceptions for very
I didn't even understand your distinction between display and accessibility
settings. Magnification tools in an OS or application are AT in my
interpretation. And both can cause the necessity of horizontal scrolling,
right as ZoomText does in the full screen magnification mode (Don't know the
exact English Terminology).
Thanks for clarifications and tutoring!
Von: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > Im Auftrag von glen
Gesendet: Freitag, 29. November 2019 18:40
An: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Betreff: Re: [WebAIM] 200% website scaling
One of the great (and aggravating) things about accessibility is that some
issues are subjective.
> Not really. It's a display setting, not an accessibility setting.
As mentioned in my reply. "Make everything bigger" (scaling) is the "Ease of
Access" settings. Those are accessibility settings.
> Let's not confuse the matter by talking about reflow, which has
to do with 1.4.4
Sure it does. You even said so yourself when you said "At any possible
viewport size, a user should be able to resize text up to 200% without
adverse effects (things being cut off, overlapping...".
If the page does not reflow properly, that can cause "things being cut off"
or "overlapping". I didn't say that 1.4.4 was *only* about reflow, but if
you don't reflow properly, you can cause 1.4.4 issues.
And since we don't know what "not usable" means in the original question, I
qualified by reply by saying it *could* be a 1.4.4 issue but without further
info, I can't say for sure.