W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2017

Re: Are links should underline all the time?

From: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 15:36:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJi9CqphycTEhQaW_1zrgabghGfrRY1DSaKFgzQ4D1eUf6WF_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Herin Hentry <herinhentry@gmail.com>
Cc: Corey Collins <ccollins@usc.edu.au>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, Kiran <kiranph@gmail.com>, w3c WAI List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
HTML's default presentation  has a purpose, accessibility being one of
them. These help user groups other than with vision impairment.
Links are underlined, contents of a TH cell in a table is bold and
centred, a border around a set of form controls within a fieldset
conveys a  grouping relationship, the relative significance of
headings  with h1 ... h6 is discernible, the element that has keyboard
focus is identifiable, and so forth.
Browsers respect these  too.
Content authors should be free to replace the presentation styles in a
manner that retains or enhances their effectiveness from an
accessibility standpoint.
Permitting them to tinker with the default presentation in a manner
that impairs accessibility should be a violation.
I am strongly in  favor of an SC along the lines of  the old Section
508 paragraph 1194.21 Para (b) Softtware Apps:

• Applications shall not disrupt or disable activated features of
other products that are identified as accessibility features, where
those features are
developed and documented according to industry standards.
• Applications also shall not disrupt or disable activated features of
any operating system that are identified as accessibility features
where the application
programming interface for those accessibility features has been
documented by the manufacturer of the operating system and is
available to the product
developer.

On the mobile platform for instance, I sometimes see that one is
unable to use the handwriting feature to input text into a form within
an application ... the developer has unknowningly done something that
has broken the handwriting feature. (example of breaking a feature
within the OS).
(I had referenced the S508 paragraph in a CSUN presentation:
http://www.mindoversight.com/csun/2016/slide8-0.html)

Thanks and best wishes,
On 7/3/17, Herin Hentry <herinhentry@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Corey and Kiran,
>
> WCAG also mentions another failure. F73: Failure of Success Criterion 1.4.1
> due to creating links that are not visually evident without color vision.
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/F73.html
>
> There is also a note as Note: If the visual cue is only provided on hover,
> it would still fail.
>
> Underline or Bold is the preferred visual clue.
>
> 2 techniques related to this are:
>
>    - G182: Ensuring that additional visual cues are available when text
>    color differences are used to convey information
>    <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G182.html>
>    - G183: Using a contrast ratio of 3:1 with surrounding text and
>    providing additional visual cues on focus for links or controls where
> color
>    alone is used to identify them
>    <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G183.html>
>
> Thanks to Patrick for the example link. It's a clear failure case.
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Herin
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Corey Collins <ccollins@usc.edu.au> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kiran
>>
>>
>>
>> My understanding, and I am happy to be corrected, is if you have
>> sufficient contrast between your link colour and your background colour
>> (Success Criterion 1.4.3 and 1.4.6), plus sufficient contrast between
>> your
>> body text and link text colour (3:1), you can provide a link with no
>> underline as long as there is an additional differentiation (underline)
>> when the link receives hover/focus.
>>
>>
>>
>> Further detail: G183: Using a contrast ratio of 3:1 with surrounding text
>> and providing additional visual cues on focus for links or controls where
>> color alone is used to identify them
>> <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G183.html>
>>
>> Examples
>>
>> *Example 1: Colors that would provide 3:1 contrast with black words and
>> 4.5:1 contrast with a white background*
>>
>> Refer to *Links with a 3:1 contrast ratio with surrounding text
>> <https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/Techniques/working-examples/G183/link-contrast.html>*
>>
>>
>>
>> If in doubt, the preferred technique is to use underlines for links.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m not a fan of links with no underline in content but I have had an
>> example at work, which I believe I could not fail and as a result, could
>> not change the business owner’s decision. I’ll persist for a change
>> anyway
>> ☺
>>
>>
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> *Corey Collins*
>> Web Accessibility Specialist
>>
>> Student Services and Engagement
>> USC
>>
>> Ph +61 7 5456 5383 <+61%207%205456%205383>
>> ccollins@usc.edu.au
>> usc.edu.au <http://www.usc.edu.au/>
>>
>> University of the Sunshine Coast CRICOS Provider No. 01595D
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Kiran <kiranph@gmail.com>
>> *Date: *Saturday, 1 July 2017 at 4:46 am
>> *To: *w3c WAI List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>> *Subject: *Are links should underline all the time?
>> *Resent-From: *<w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>> *Resent-Date: *Saturday, 1 July 2017 at 4:47 am
>>
>>
>>
>> Hey All,
>>
>>
>>
>> I need expert advice in learning and more clarifying the concept of WCAG
>> 1.4.1 Link treatment.
>>
>>
>>
>> As per https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/F73.html , if links do not have
>> underline or other visual cues will it be a failure?
>>
>>
>>
>> so If I have added a link in the paragraph where body text is black while
>> the link within this paragraph is blue ( enough CCR), will that be a
>> failure to WCAG 1.4.1 if I don't provide underline to this link?
>>
>>
>>
>> So does that mean, links should always be underlined in a paragraph or in
>> a sentence?
>>
>>
>>
>> I was under the assumption that if links have a different color, plus it
>> shows underline(or any visual clue) on hover/focus, should be okay and
>> passes WCAG 1.4.1.
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/F73.html
>>
>>
>>
>> I appreciate your opinion in clearing my confusion on this.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> USC, Locked Bag 4, Maroochydore DC, Queensland, 4558 Australia.
>> CRICOS Provider No: 01595D
>> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>> This email is confidential. If received in error, please delete it from
>> your system.
>>
>


-- 
Sailesh Panchang
Principal Accessibility Consultant
Deque Systems Inc
Phone 703-225-0380 ext 105
Mobile: 571-344-1765
Received on Monday, 3 July 2017 19:36:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 3 July 2017 19:36:57 UTC