Resize text heavy on text-only resizing, and misleading advice about scrolling

[patrickhlauke]

While https://www.w3.org/WAI/test-evaluate/preliminary/#resize does mention full-page zoom as an option, it still gives possibly undue emphasis on text-only resizing, leaving many users/readers with the impression that if a page fails with text-only resize, it fails 1.4.4 - which is not the case, as 1.4.4 only mandates that there be a way to resize text, not any specific one. See also w3c/wcag#2270 and w3c/wcag#2169 and oodles of such discussions in Slack/Twitter/mailing lists.

The prose in this section could do with some rebalancing, and tests steps for just testing with zoom should be included.

---

The section also includes the bullet Horizontal scrolling is not required to read sentences or "blocks of text".... Again, this gives the impression that this is required from a resize text point of view. However, 1.4.4 normatively says nothing about scrolling - which is why this was actually specified in WCAG 2.1 under 1.4.10 Reflow.

I'd recommend qualifying this bullet (making it clear it's a best practice for 1.4.4, but not normatively required), or expanding this to also cover the newer 1.4.10 Reflow and making it clear that that aspect falls under that.

[patrickhlauke]

related: this proposed PR of mine for 1.4.4 understanding w3c/wcag#2270

[shawna-slh]

Thanks. PR welcome.

EOWG Co-Chairs, at least addressing the more egregious issues would be good, ASAPfeasible.

[iadawn]

Include 1.4.10 Reflow into Zoom

[mellis481]

@patrickhlauke I just want to confirm my interpretation of your original post with a specific example.

If a webpage allows for the user to zoom the content with the browser's full-page zoom function at least 200% and everything scales uniformly, is readable, and all functionality is retained, BUT text-only zoom of at least 200% "fails" (meaning some text is unreadable and/or functionality is lost), you are saying that this would NOT be an a11y failure because I have provided at least one zoom mechanism that works. Is that correct?

[patrickhlauke]

yes, and that has been a long-standing interpretation. the SC doesn't require that a particular mechanism, or all mechanisms, work.

[mellis481]

yes, and that has been a long-standing interpretation. the SC doesn't require that a particular mechanism, or all mechanisms, work.

Thanks for confirming!

ps. Your PR has conflicts that need to be resolved.