W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) - Sufficient Technique for UI Controls

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:35:22 -0500
To: Marc Johlic <johlic@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-id: <C37196EC-C6B0-470A-BCED-F9467FA42E52@trace.wisc.edu>
For advisory that is OK

But I would make a note in the technique that it is not always possible to have both the text on controls and the controls both meet the text provision.   The text is key.  The controls do NOT need to be 4.5 to 1

Actually I think I would make the advisory be that the contrast is 3:1.     There is no 'font size' to controls === and you don't need that high a contrast  (4.5) when it is not letters. 

Also note that outlining can make things meet guidelines they otherwise could not. 


Gregg
-----------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering
University of Wisconsin-Madison

On Mar 30, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Marc Johlic wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback on this. Given the responses and some brief discussion on last week's WCAG Working Group call, I would like to hear if there are any objections to adding the following as an Advisory Technique to 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum):
> Making user interface controls that meet the contrast provisions for text
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Marc Johlic 
> Accessibility Consultant
> Human Ability & Accessibility Center, IBM Research
> 
> ( (T/L) 391-5905 | External 813-356-3081 
> * johlic@us.ibm.com	
> For self-help visit us at the IBM Human Ability & Accessibility Center
> Follow us on ibm.com/able | <27536816.gif>Facebook | <27793746.gif>Twitter
> <27968613.gif>
> 
> <graycol.gif>Gregg Vanderheiden ---03/28/2011 05:58:59 PM---On Mar 25, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Sailesh Panchang wrote: > ark,
> 
> From:	Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
> To:	Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>
> Cc:	w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org, Marc Johlic/Tampa/IBM@IBMUS
> Date:	03/28/2011 05:58 PM
> Subject:	Re: 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) - Sufficient Technique for UI Controls
> Sent by:	w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 25, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Sailesh Panchang wrote:
> ark,
> However, we still run into problems with developers on their active UI >components because they are quick to point out that the techniques state >"text or images of text". Therefore their UI controls (or icons) are exempt >from 1.4.3 because they do not have any text associated with them.
> Well in reality these active UI elements fail SC 1.1.1 . They are non text elements that have no text equivalents. How is a non-visual user supposed to understand what they are? So the UI elements need to comply with SC 1.1.1 first, then evaluated for SC 1.4.3 (contrast) and SC 2.4.7 (visual focus indicator). 
> No problem with WCAG 2 there.
> But I do not understand why "inactive controls that are not visible to anyone" figure in the text of SC 1.4.3 under exceptions. If it is not visible then how does contrast matter?
> My contention is that SC 1.4.3 and SC 2.4.7 should be elevated to Level A status. I see quite a few transgressions of these SC. There are no readily available and workable fixes via features of the browser / assistive technology for these two SC. In fact some users who do not use AT may encounter these issues. The fixes have to be done by Web content developers. I'll be happy to learn if this is incorrect. 
> Sailesh Panchang
> Director, Accessibility Services
> www.deque.com 
> Tel 571-449-3576
> 
> Hi Sailesh
> 
> Some quick notes that may help with this. 
> 
> RE: 1.4.3 and "inactive controls that are not visible to anyone
> There is no exception for "inactive controls that are not visible to anyone". I think you are reading the provision wrong. 
> Incidental: Text or images of text that are part of an inactive user interface component, that are pure decoration, that are not visible to anyone, or that are part of a picture that contains significant other visual content, have no contrast requirement.
> 
> should be read as 
> Incidental: Text or images of text
> - that are part of an inactive user interface component, 
> - that are pure decoration, 
> - that are not visible to anyone, or 
> - that are part of a picture that contains significant other visual content, 
> have no contrast requirement.
> 
> 
> The "not visible to anyone" is there because sometimes people will put white text on white background to add text that is visible to screen readers users only. or for other reasons. This simply says that contrast rules do not apply to that text. 
> 
> 
> RE: Elevating SC 
> - that is not possible anymore. The WCAG 2.0 has been released and cannot be changed. 
> 
> 
> RE work arounds 
> --- The text is programmatically determinable so it can be rendered in high contrast if needed using a plug in or special AT. 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 19:36:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 March 2011 19:36:16 GMT