- From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 07:13:20 +0100 (BST)
- To: "Matthew R. Moore" <mrmoore@truman.edu>
- cc: Lois Wakeman <lois@lois.co.uk>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, immelie@hotmail.com
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Matthew R. Moore wrote:
> When we had a seminar on accessibility, one of my friends here at
> the University (who is color deficient) mentioned that until a week or
> two before the meeting, he didn't realize that MS Word underlined
> mis-spelled
> words in red and grammatical errors in green (when those options are turned
> on).
Hmmm. I don't know how he could deal with that.
> Another example along the same vein that we discussed is when form
> validators change
> the color of the text on the form to a certain color (i.e. red) and say that
> "fields in
> red must be completed" - if someone can't distinguish red for some reason,
> how can
> they know that the form field is required?
Now that on the other hand is easy, and serves to demonstrate the
inherent accessibility of HTML/CSS (when not abused). The author
specifies in CSS
.mandatory { color: red ; }
and the colour-blind user has an instant override, specifying a user
stylesheet that distinguishes mandatory fields in a manner that is
accessible to him.
> I can't speak for how accurate it is, but at
> http://www.vischeck.com/vischeck/
> there is a mechanism to test how your site would look to individuals with
> certain
> color vision deficiences.
Looks interesting, though I'm no more qualified than you to pronounce
on its accuracy. Seems to embed the CSS, rewriting colour attributes
on-the-fly. Sort-of like a CSS-selector choice of document views
in reverse.
--
Nick Kew
In need of paying work - http://www.webthing.com/~nick/cv.html
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 02:13:26 UTC