W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: changing presentation of links

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 17:54:48 -0500
To: Alastair Campbell <alastc@gmail.com>
Cc: W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-id: <9182CC32-A6C4-4B5D-BF78-FD6145394BE8@trace.wisc.edu>
this issue was just raised in public comment.   If you don't see the reply there -- you will see the reply shortly.

PS - G183 says more than that.  It has to also be distinguishable before you point at it -- the pointing only makes it more distinguishable.   

so the failure and the G183 are not in conflict

Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info
Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project -  http://GPII.net

On Mar 22, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Alastair Campbell <alastc@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> Sorry to jump on an old thread, but I'm back in the accessibility
> universe now, and this came up today.
> Specifically on link colour and distinguishing links from general
> text, there's a conflict in the success & fail criteria for 1.4.1.
> The test from G183 [1] specifically says that changing the link on
> mouseover/focus to include an underline or other mechanism is ok,
> whereas F73 [2] says that is not sufficient.
>> From the previous discussion, it sounds like G183 should be
> deprecated, as if we are talking about "people who cannot perceive
> color differences" then the contrast aspect is irrelevant.
> -Alastair
> 1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20120103/G183
> 2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20120103/F73
Received on Friday, 22 March 2013 22:55:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:47 UTC