W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Colorblindness references

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 06:48:42 -0800
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010128063325.02a6d9e0@mail.gorge.net>
To: Dick Brown <dickb@microsoft.com>, "'w3c-wai-gl@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 02:49 PM 1/25/01 -0800, Dick Brown wrote:
>I do not think we should *recommend* color schemes

The other side of this coin is whether we should, even in techniques, 
specify proscribed colors but rather point to a collection of references of 
the kind sited by Dick herein. As a technique it's likely that inclusion of 
"consider color" is apt but details of that get into things that involve 
i18n ("penguins hate purple" - never put red on a site that mentions the 
God of Hope, etc.).

In the sense of "using color" we are addressing (i.e. color *not* as 
"color") in checkpoints it is entirely a matter of presentation and rules 
for its use therein are like the rules for the use of any other 
presentational factor. In this context it is no different than the "rules" 
for which fonts (their genera and size) are to be used for presentational 
purposes.

We are concerned with the semantics of color use, if any. E.g. it is a 
frequent admonishment in email to advise not to use all caps - "why are you 
SHOUTING AT US?" - but it's possible that the miscreant has a computer that 
only displays caps! In the case of color certain "bad taste" factors are so 
built-in that they seem "intuitively obvious" - they're not.

To belabor the point I've appended a .wav file which is not viral, but you 
need not listen to it.

--
Love.
                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE


Received on Sunday, 28 January 2001 09:48:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:09 GMT