Meeting minutes
Preview: https://
gpellegrino: this is last Wendy proposal. Is there any comment suggestion feedback? We can take 5 bminutes to read the Legibility section which is the major improvement here.
gautierchomel: I was lost by the list of success criteria
… then the list is retaken in subsections
… I would prefer to have one subsession for Sussess Criteria
… or we want to keep the Success Criteria together, then I would remove the first list
SimonPRH: I might have lost a part of the discussion related to the removing of font related considerations.
gpellegrino: yes, font faces are not in WCAG requirements.
SimonPRH: that seems to me it shpould be in fxl guidelines because we can't change the font here.
CharlesL: proposing a font instead of another may be diplomaticaly complex
<sueneu> p+
gpellegrino: maybe it could be usefull to add links to the WCAG success criteria to help the uinderstanding like it's done in 2.5.2.2. If we agree on that, shall we add that on the other sections?
CircularKen: yes, i feel that's a good idea to have link to the riules we are refering to.
gpellegrino: is someone available this week to make proposals?
CharlesL: we all know fxl has issues, are we saying that clearly here that we can't reach wcag 2.2AA?
sueneu: i'm willing to help but I don't understand the mecanism to contribute to this document.
CircularKen: WCAG A is achievable, not AA because of resize / reflow.
JonasLillqvist: most of the sections under legibility are actually not specific to fxl if you look at to visual adjustement, there yes we have specific fxl things, but not in visual design where we see things that are true for reflowable epub too.
CircularKen: the complexity of fxl layouts imposes to go deeper in graphic design best practices like legibility. Also I've understood that multiple span is a problem for screen readers is that still the case?
q§
gpellegrino: it depends on the settings of the screen reader. But problem with span is when you change text display, it breaks. We can mention span difficulties in visual more than in screen reader section.
gautierchomel: we had this problem on TTS in thorium for quite a while
… but now it's fixed
SimonPRH: back on wcag A target, we shall not make it too central but rather referencing where it is relevant. To make sure that people still want to do the best possible work.
CharlesL: Bee Line Reader changes line colors to help reading. It will break up at every tag breaking the content. They might have insights on the issues they faced. I will ask them.
CircularKen: we could say "AA minus reflowable".
https://
gpellegrino: there are still open questions but technically wa can say a pdf is AA compiant (the how to guide says that a success criteria will be written for pdf), we could say the same.
<CharlesL> Here is the website for BeeLine Reader https://
gautierchomel: I think we should clearly say that FXL is fixed and cannot reflow
… the fact that all the rest can be AA should be underlined
… we should focus on what is possible and don't foul the reader
… this leads again on how to add reflowable content to FXL
<CircularKen> "There are ongoing discussions about transforming visual publication into reflowable textual content for complete AA compliance. Whilst these are not in production yet, by creating our fixed-layout to AA we are preparing our files in the best way for these future developments."
+1
CircularKen: how about that line of text clarifying?
+1
<sueneu> +1
<JonasLillqvist> +1
<CircularKen> There are ongoing discussions about transforming visual publications into reflowable textual content for complete AA compliance. Whilst these are not in production yet, by creating our fixed-layout to AA where possible we are preparing our files in the best way for these future developments.
SimonPRH: this document is to say the state of the art of fxl accessibility. We should be clear in what is achievable.
gpellegrino: what if we say per criteria how difficult it is to achieve (simple medium, complex)?
gautierchomel: it's a great idea, but how to achieve that without naming one or other tool?
gpellegrino: to resume, i see open questions : refactoring the document per success criteria? ; do we want to stay on WCAG A line base or also mention AA (i feel we are on the second) : do we have the possibility to mention a difficulty level?
<SimonPRH> +1
<sueneu> +1
<CharlesL> +1 to merge
gpellegrino: then we have a proposal from Ken we'll summit. Is that ok for everyone if we merge the actual wendy's work
+1
CircularKen: there's also an open question on the font (should we mention Font again)
gpellegrino: ok, i'll add that to the next agenda.
gpellegrino: thanks, see you next week.