W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2016

Re: [css-color] Comment from APA

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:53:15 -0400
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, W3C WAI Accessible Platform Architectures <public-apa@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20160811165315.GA1771@opera.rednote.net>
Hello, Tab:

Thank you for your note. We have two responses below.

Tab Atkins Jr. writes:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
> > Colleagues:
> >
> > The Accessible Platform Architectures (APA) Working Group requests
> > addition of the following section to the specification css color module
> > level 4
> > https://www.w3.org/tr/css-color-4/
> >
> > Accessibility Impact Statement
> >
> > Content authors should be mindful of requirements on color
> > contrast as expressed in WCAG 2.0 Success Criterion 1.4.3:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html
> >
> > . See also :
> > https://www.w3.org/WAI/perspectives/contrast.html
> >
> > It is particularly important to be mindful of this requirement when a
> > transparency is present because automated measurement is not available
> > to quantatively and correctly judge whether sufficient contrast is being
> > provided, thus requiring application of informed human judgement on a
> > case by case basis.
> >
> > APA Consensus Documentation
> >
> > This request is a consensus position of APA as documented at:
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2016Aug/0008.html
> 
> Note that we already have a similar reference to WCAG 1.4.1:
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/#notes>.  Just making sure y'all


1.)	We appreciate the reference at 3.1. However, the current
language covers only one concern. We have added additional concerns that
we believe should be explicitly called out.

	So, perhaps the language at 3.1 might combine what you already
	have about not relying on color alone with our comment on
	contrast, and especially on the need for human verification of
	sufficient contrast when transparencies are involved.

> really want to be adding an additional a11y notice to the spec, or if
> y'all missed the existing one and it's enough.
> 

2.)	We would still request an Accessibility Impact statement which
should, certainly, link to 3.1 in this case.

	We are tending toward asking for Accessibility Impact statements
	in all W3C specifications. There are several reasons we are
	tending toward this approach including most especially assisting
	whatever individual on a developer team who draws the
	responsibility for checking accessibility. We are inclined we
	should ease that task rather than asking people to ferret out
	relevant accessibility considerations from the entire
	specification.

	We expect this approach will be among those we discuss at the
	upcoming TPAC session on improving horizontal review.

	Janina

> ~TJ

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
		Email:	janina@rednote.net

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2016 16:53:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 11 August 2016 16:53:41 UTC