[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Re: Fw: [office-accessibility] Re: [office] Table RefreshDelay
I totally agree with Peter... Malte. Peter Korn wrote: > Dave, > > I believe there are two, separate issues here. They are: > > 1. What are the appropriate units to use for table refresh in ODF? > -> what I've heard suggested from TC members is the ISO standard > for this, which allows time to be expressed in milliseconds as well as > larger increments > > 2. Where is/are the appropriate place/s to ensure that user > interactions with an ODF document won't cause a seizure? > -> what I suggest is the appropriate place is in the ODF > application, not the document format specification > > The reasons I suggest the appropriate place is in the ODF applications > are: > > 1. The app is where the rendering & user interaction occur > 2. Not in all cases does a table refresh have the potential to > trigger a seizure (only if enough of the field of view is making a > sufficient luminosity change in the triggering frequency range). > 3. My belief that the purview of the ODF accessibility subcommittee > is accessibility issues (and not anything beyond that). I personally > feel free to offer my opinions on all manner of things ODF-related, > but I do so as a member of OASIS interested in ODF; not with my > "accessibility hat" on. > 4. My own sense that user interface considerations should not dictate > encoding schemes, they should simply place requirements on what is > needed (and thus I wouldn't say that the only valid table refresh > number must explicitly be outside of the range of 3-50Hz). > > > Thus whether or not I believe a vendor or any application author does > or does not have good reason to update some portion of the screen at > greater than >3Hz, my sole accessibility concern is whether that > update has the other attributes needed to trigger a seizure. If not, > then my aesthetic or other considerations are only those, and not an > accessibility statement. > > And I further believe that only the rendering application is in a > position to make the determination as to whether the other > seizure-triggering characteristics are at play or not (e.g. a two cell > table in 9 point font where only black pixel text on a white > background is updating at potentially 5Hz when displayed on a > 1280x1024 screen at 72dpi should be well below the seizure threshold, > while a table update that includes changing the background color of > the cell from black to white in a 50 cell table at 24 point font at > 5Hz is certainly over the threshold). > > Whether or not something is a good idea from a design or aesthetics > point of view, if it doesn't cause a true accessibility problem then > it isn't my job to make sure it is fixed. > > > Regards, > > Peter Korn > Accessibility Architect, > Sun Microsystems, Inc. > > > >> 2008/7/20 Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>: >> >> >>> My suggestion would be to be to take an excerpt from our ODF accessibility >>> Guidelines for 1.2 and place it in the ODF guidelines in the section on >>> Table Refresh Delay. Something on the order that Office applications SHOULD >>> provide a facility to enable the user to limit table refresh delays to no >>> more than three times per second. Failure to do so may cause seizures in >>> some ODF users. >>> >>> We could make this a MUST but I don't know of all uses for ODF documents. >>> Additionally, we should provide guidance to ODF content authors which would >>> be in line with this W3C WCAG requirement. >>> >> >> Tell me a vendor who justifiably refreshes at >3Hz in a human facing app? >> >> Yet again we bow to the vendors Rich? >> Pretty please instead of do it because its right? >> >> I'll ride with it, but it's wrong IMO. >> >> >> regards >> >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]