W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2012

Fw: UPDATE suggested alternatives to accessible version

From: Jonathan Hassell <jonathanhassell@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 00:05:04 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <1329696304.70222.YahooMailNeo@web24803.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
To: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Thanks for your comments, David.



Hassell Inclusion is my site, and I take inclusion very seriously.

Accordingly, you'll find that both of the colour combinations you mention meet WCAG-AA rather than having 'almost zero colour contrast'.

However, you're right that the shade of blue I used only met AA for the large text on which it was used on the home page. The contrast could have been better for smaller text used elsewhere. I've darkened the shade accordingly so it passes all WCAG-AA tests at whatever size I use it.

Thanks for pointing this out.

In turn, could I point out that high colour contrast colour-schemes, whilst helping many people with vision impairments, actually hinder a great number of dyslexic people from reading the page.

That's why 'universal design' doesn't work - it's not universally good for everyone, as people with different disabilities have completely contradictory colour preferences.

So it's impossible to please everyone, unless you provide a means of changing the colours on the site.

This is something I'm already looking into, as I already mention on my site's accessibility statement: http://www.hassellinclusion.com/accessibility/

As for 'large areas white on the first two screenfuls' - no-one else has experienced this problem. Could you let me know which browser you're using? (I've tested the pages in Chrome, Safari, Firefox and IE 8...)

If you have any other comments on how you think my site could be improved, please email me on jonathan@hassellinclusion.com.

Jonathan.



________________________________
 From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org 
Sent: Saturday, 18 February 2012, 22:32
Subject: Re: UPDATE suggested alternatives to accessible version
 
Carla wrote:

> http://www.hassellinclusion.com/2011/12/accessibility-myths-2011/

Were these examples of how not to write universal pages?

Dark green on grey in the tabs: almost zero colour contrast.

Light green on white in the body text, also a poor colour contrast, but not nearly as bad.

Large areas of white space on the first two screenfuls; I presume it only works in one browser.

Centre justification in the print
 version - at least they do have a print version and it doesn't go off the edge of the paper.
-- David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Monday, 20 February 2012 00:06:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 February 2012 00:06:10 GMT