W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > March 2008

Re: review off the different resolutions on my comments

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:11:50 -0700
Message-ID: <824e742c0803211611p1103049fg83bd995c2c406669@mail.gmail.com>
To: "aurélien levy" <aurelien.levy@free.fr>
Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 4:00 AM, aurélien levy <aurelien.levy@free.fr> wrote:

>  Comment 6: 5 is too much and missing exceptions
>  Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2008Jan/0004.html
>  (Issue ID: 2381)
>
>  you say :
>  "We reviewed a variety of popular Web sites and we only found a few
>  places on a couple of pages where 5:1 was not met. Also note that
>  logos are already excepted."
>
>  I didn't know witch website you test but during my own test on alexa top 500 most visited website and fortune global 500 2007 compagny website most of them failed. Here is an extract :
>  - https://www.bankofamerica.com/
>  - http://www.pg.com/
>  - http://www.youtube.com/
>  - http://www.live.com/
>  - http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx
>  - http://www.ebay.com/
>  - http://www.dailymotion.com
>  - http://www.amazon.com/
>  - http://www.gm.com/
>  - http://www.yahoo.com/
>  - http://www.msn.com/
>  - http://www.myspace.com/
>  - http://fr.facebook.com/
>  - http://www.walmart.com/
>  - http://www.ge.com/
>  - http://www.att.com/
>  - http://www.cisco.com/
>  - http://www.coca-cola.com/template1/index.jsp?locale=en_US
>  - http://www.merck.com/
>  - http://www.manpower.com/
>  - http://www.apple.com/
>  - http://www.gap.com/
>
>  and governmental/non profit website is not better :
>  - http://www.un.org/
>  - http://www.whitehouse.gov/
>  - http://www.senate.gov/
>  - http://www.nato.int/home-fr.htm
>  - http://www.redcross.org/
>  - even http://www.w3.org/
>
>  Furthermore, I don't see where is the exception for Logo, color combinaison and image of text who is part of a Corporate Visual guideline done before the introduction of this new criteria. It's not always pure decoration or incidental.
>
>  By the way, reading the guideline again, I see another problem. You give the size of the font with point unit "14 point bold or 18 point". On the web most of the font are in pixel, em, %, keyword. I think it's better to say in the large scale definition :
>  "with at least a visual rendering of 18px or 14px bold
>  through the browser with the default settings
>
>  ----------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your comments.

You are correct that many of the pages you cite do not meet the
requirements for this provision in their entirety. However, a large
percentage of the content on many of these pages already includes text
that has a contrast of 5:1 or greater (ex. body text, navigation
menus, etc). In many cases, the sites fail because an image of text,
copyright notice or small block of text where color combinations do
not meet the requirement are included.

In many cases, we believe that meeting this (Level AA) requirement
would require very few changes for most sites. For example, increasing
the contrast or size of text slightly would enable many sites that
nearly meet the requirements to meet or exceed it. For example, a
number of sites include white text on a gray background (or the
inverse) with somewhere between 4:1 and 5:1 contrast. Darkening the
gray in these situations would impact the visual design of the site
very little (often, so little that users wouldn't even notice the
change), but would be enough to meet the requirement.

Regarding the lack of logo exception on this provision, it was
intended but not clear so we have added a clear exception. It now
reads:

Logotypes: Text that is part of a logo or brand name has no minimum
contrast requirement.

Corporate visual guidelines beyond logo and logotype are not included
in this exception.

Your suggestion on the Large Print is also good. However, we think
that is addressed with our Note 4 which says basically the same thing
we believe but covers more cases.

"Note 4: When using text without specifying the font size, the
smallest font size used on major browsers for unspecified text would
be a reasonable size to assume for the font. If a level 1 heading is
rendered in 14pt bold or higher on major browsers, then it would be
reasonable to assume it is large text. Relative scaling can be
calculated from the default sizes in a similar fashion."
Received on Friday, 21 March 2008 23:12:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 17 July 2011 06:13:25 GMT