Re: SC 1.4.11

Hi Patrick,

I don't disagree, which is why I would like to see the *interpretation* for
this SC unambiguously state that you need to test for all possible
browsers: that if you've not modified all foreground colors (including
state) when you've modified the background then there is a likelihood this
will fail somewhere.

The SC and exception state:

*​​User Interface Components*
*​:* ​
Visual information required to identify user interface components
<https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-user-interface-components> and states
<https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-states>
​*​
, except for inactive components or where the appearance of the component
is determined by the user agent and not modified by the author;

​(* these are separate, as they have different definitions)

My argument against the narrow interpretation is that we've explicitly
defined both components AND states as requiring sufficient contrast​, but
the exception ONLY applies to components (and not explicitly states), which
if that was the intent would have then had the following exception language:

*​User Interface Components*
*​:* ​
Visual information required to identify user interface components and
states, except for inactive components or where the appearance of the
component *or state* is determined by the user agent and not modified by
the author;

​
Visible tab focus is a state​, and that is not called out in the exception,
so it is exempt from the exception. I've always read this as being for
components like an un-styled submit button.

I've updated my example page at: http://john.foliot.ca/demos/SC_1_4_11.html to
capture this as well.

JF

On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:29 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
wrote:

> Of course, the problem is that it IS down to the browser whether something
> passes or fails otherwise. And then, you'd have define clearly which
> browsers to target/test in. Where do you draw the line? What if in one
> browser, by default, the contrast of the focus indication is too low, but
> in all others it's fine out of the box? Is that a fail, dependent on the
> market share of the browser?
>
> This is the sort of thing that a best practice is much better suited to
> tackle than a hard binary pass/fail, I'd say.
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>


-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion