W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > site-comments@w3.org > March 2003

Re: [Fwd: [Moderator Action] Re: Specifying Of Both Background AND Foreground Color]

From: Michal Suchanek <suchanek@dec59.ruk.cuni.cz>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 17:22:58 +0100
Message-ID: <3E662462.3050804@dec59.ruk.cuni.cz>
To: site-comments@w3.org

Dave Allen Barker Jr wrote:
 > > Well done!
 > > Only two weeks later, and a qick paruse has shown the issue I raised
 > fixed by the fine folks at the W3C.
 > > Ah, the power of the stylesheet...
 > > > My default foreground and background colors for web browsing 
happen to
 > > be unconventional (foreground: #cccccc, background: #000000).  With 
this
 > > scheme, I found areas of the W3C's site serve me poorly, as they do not
 > > follow the W3C's own recommendations for accessibility.  The result is
 > > poor (light gray on white) (or with particular colors, zero) contrast
 > > between foreground and background colors.
 > >
 > > I refer to the lack of implementation of item 9.1 "Color Contrast" in
 > > the "CSS Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0" (
 > > http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-CSS-TECHS/#style-color-contrast ),
 > > specifically the last line, "Ensure that foreground and background
 > > colors contrast well. If specifying a foreground color, always 
specify a
 > > background color as well (and vice versa)."
 > >
 > > While composing this email, I found examples of this nonconformance in:
 > > http://www.w3.org/
 > > http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/
 > > http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-CSS-TECHS/
 > >
 > > Although the site (well, at least the homepage) bares only WAI-AA
 > > conformance, and the issue I'm raising is Priority 3, is there a good
 > > reason it hasn't been implemented?  I applaud what the W3C is trying to
 > > do, and would like to see you take the lead in implementation! :^)

Thanks for fixing the above mentioned pages at W3C. It made my 
navigation thtrough the site a bit easier.

However, while browsing the W3C web site I found these pages do not set 
colors correctly (or set them in a way my browser does not understand):


Background color:
http://www.w3c.org/Mail/Lists.html
http://www.w3.org/Mail/Request

Text (and link) color:
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/
http://www.w3.org/Library/User/Guide/#Expat

Link color:
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ (link color)
http://validator.w3.org/
http://www.w3.org/Jigsaw/
http://www.w3.org/DOM/
http://www.w3.org/Style/LieBos2e/enter/
http://www.w3.org/Style/css2-updates/REC-CSS2-19980512-errata
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/
http://www.w3.org/Amaya/
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/PNG/
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/

Visited Link color (only)
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/

Most problematic pages have only link color unspecified but most 
keywords in recommendations link to their definition which makes the 
whole text very hard to read.

Michal Suchanek
hramrach_l@centrum.cz
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 11:29:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:21:27 GMT