WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 200, Issue 10

for

From: Artem Sergeevich Akopyan
Date: Feb 2, 2023 12:30PM

why are we still on WCAG 2.1?

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 2:00 PM < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> Send WebAIM-Forum mailing list submissions to
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://list.webaim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webaim-forum
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of WebAIM-Forum digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. WCAG 1.4.4 Resizing Text and Zoom (Alan Zaitchik)
> 2. Re: WCAG 1.4.4 Resizing Text and Zoom (glen walker)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Alan Zaitchik < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 20:51:48 -0500
> Subject: [WebAIM] WCAG 1.4.4 Resizing Text and Zoom
> This is really long. I apologize, but I wanted to expose the reasoning
> behind my question.
>
> My question concerns WCAG 1.4.4 (“Resize Text”), viz. whether it is enough
> to test with browser zoom or must one test with setting font size to 200%
> the system default or medium font size. This problem is acute for one of
> our applications where we (alas) inherited dependence on a third-party
> software package that builds grids into which we stream data; these grids
> do not adequately resize to accommodate resized text, although they work
> just fine with browser zoom.
> Reading through the WCAG materials I find a certain ambiguity regarding
> the satisfaction conditions for 1.4.4. On the one hand “Understanding
> Success Criterion 1.4.4: Resize text” (
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/resize-text.html) says:
> The scaling of content is primarily a user agent responsibility. User
> agents that satisfy UAAG 1.0 Checkpoint 4.1 allow users to configure text
> scale. The author's responsibility is to create Web content that does not
> prevent the user agent from scaling the content effectively.
> That seems to say that where the user agent has a mechanism to scale
> content the author’s responsibility is simply not to prevent the user agent
> mechanism from working. Zoom scales content, and our code does not prevent
> that. So arguably we’re ok.
>
> But read on…
>
> … The author cannot rely on the user agent to satisfy this Success
> Criterion for HTML content if users do not have access to a user agent with
> zoom support. For example, if they work in an environment that requires
> them to use IE 6.
>
> If the author is using a technology whose user agents do not provide zoom
> support, the author is responsible to provide this type of functionality
> directly or to provide content that works with the type of functionality
> provided by the user agent.
>
> Can we rely on the user agent zoom where the browser does have zoom? We
> support only recent browsers, all of which support zoom. IE 6 is definitely
> not our concern. Again, it could be argued that we are ok relying on zoom.
> But surely some users might not use zoom or even know of its possibility!
> So perhaps we cannot rely on it.
>
> Now for a statement that seems very clear.
>
> Technique G142 “Using a technology that has commonly-available user agents
> that support zoom” for SC 1.4.4 (
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Techniques/general/G142.html) explicitly
> states:
> The objective of this technique is to ensure content can be scaled
> uniformly by using a Web technology supported by user agents that change
> text size via a Zoom tool.
>
> Content authored in technologies that are supported by user agents that
> can scale content uniformly (that is, zoom into content) satisfy this
> Success Criterion.
>
> The examples given are IE 7 and Adobe Reader zoom or magnification tools.
> What could be more explicit than that?
>
> And yet … Many (most?) people with vision disabilities do set their font
> size larger at the system level and do not use browser zoom, even when it
> is available. So even if browser-delivered content could be zoomed is it
> appropriate to require users to do so where rescaling font size fails to
> keep all content available? It could certainly be argued that the spirit of
> 1.4.4 is not respected for users chancing upon pages where their normally
> rescaled text suddenly is illegible, and an additional action is required
> of them. On mobile devices some users will have great difficulty with
> pinching to zoom.
>
> What is your practice regarding this Satisfaction Condition? In your
> experience is zoom or text resizing the dominant method by which users with
> impaired vision enlarge text?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Alan
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: glen walker < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 08:41:42 -0700
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] WCAG 1.4.4 Resizing Text and Zoom
> I test with ctrl++ or cmd++ in the browser and see how the content reacts.
> 1.4.4 says there should be no loss of "content or functionality". 1.4.4
> does not say that you (the page author) must provide a way to scale the
> text. That is, you don't need to provide a "font increase" button if the
> browser doesn't support ctrl++.
>
> You could also test 1.4.4 by using the browser's font settings but that's
> more work. Using ctrl++ is faster and easier but 1.4.4 doesn't tell you
> how you should test it.
>
> > > > >