W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2002

Re: Colors and the WCAG

From: C. Bottelier <c.bottelier@iradis.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:47:43 +0200
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021020193453.00a43880@mail2.iradis.org>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org


>disagreement on default colours - any tendency for tools to set
>background to white, is probaby an attempt to make Netscape behave
>like Internet Explorer, for people who don't change the colours
>themselves).

The least the tools should also do is set the documents foreground
and link colours as well.

The behaviour I've seen in the tools is that most of them let the
colours alone, until you press the Ok or Apply button in some of
the property editors in which one has the possibility to change
the page layout. After you click on the button (and haven't changed
anything in the dialog) a repative random set of attributes is forced.

For example the bgcolor of the body element, and a spontanious font
face=arial around the whole document. Not to mentoin a few hundred
times a <span lang="" class="">. (But this is another problem)

This seems more as a failed is-dialog-field-changed routine.

>(Whilst designers normally know the colour of the paper they use,
>logo designers cannot always rely on this, even though the design
>concept may try to mandate a particular colour.)
>
>Failing to fully specify colours (even allowing for the cascade) is
>really quite common.  It's especially common where people mix legacy
>and CSS methods.

And thus creating less accessible pages, because a user of alternate
colours should disable the color support in his browser, introducing
other problems like floating elements for menu's, conflicting
background images and so on.

Christian
Received on Sunday, 20 October 2002 13:40:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:07 GMT