- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 16:28:55 -0700
- To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org
Dear Chris Lilley , Thank you for your comments on the 2006 Last Call Working Draft of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/). We appreciate the interest that you have taken in these guidelines. We apologize for the delay in getting back to you. We received many constructive comments, and sometimes addressing one issue would cause us to revise wording covered by an earlier issue. We therefore waited until all comments had been addressed before responding to commenters. This message contains the comments you submitted and the resolutions to your comments. Each comment includes a link to the archived copy of your original comment on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/, and may also include links to the relevant changes in the updated WCAG 2.0 Public Working Draft at http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/. PLEASE REVIEW the decisions for the following comments and reply to us by 7 June at public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org to say whether you are satisfied with the decision taken. Note that this list is publicly archived. We also welcome your comments on the rest of the updated WCAG 2.0 Public Working Draft by 29 June 2007. We have revised the guidelines and the accompanying documents substantially. A detailed summary of issues, revisions, and rationales for changes is at http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/05/change-summary.html . Please see http://www.w3.org/WAI/ for more information about the current review. Thank you, Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact On behalf of the WCAG Working Group ---------------------------------------------------------- Comment 1: Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/20060522154433.CF78166363@dolph.w3.org (Issue ID: LC-580) Part of Item: Comment Type: TE Comment (including rationale for proposed change): The term "luminosity" is incorrect here (it applies only to certain Broadcast video signals). Relative luninance is the correct term. When used as a ratio, the difference between absolute and relative Luminance can be dropped, but the term luminance rather than luminosity should be used. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/appendixA.html#luminosity-contrastdef defines the coefficients for calculating luminance, and its good to see that the Rec.709 chromaticities are used (rather than, for example, the NTSC ones which do not apply to modern computer monitors at all). (the coeeficients are correct, see the "luminanceToAlpha" section of http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/filters.html#feColorMatrix but the specification does not explain why this is so. However the text as it stands implies that the formula given is universally applicable. it is not. This is particularly importnt when printing Web materials. Proposed Change: change "luminosity" to luminance throughout. change "The luminosity of a color is defined as" to "the luminance of an sRGB color is defined as". change "blue RGB values" to "blue sRGB values" (the equation does not apply to other color spaces). Remove the exponentiation operator and the 2.2 gamma approximation. Instead, use the correct sRGB transfer curve. Reference the sRGB specification. See the SVG 1.2Tiny specification for an example of how to reference it. You may want to note that the equation given is only correct for typicalcolor vision (the ISO standard observer). For atypical color vision, often incorrectly termed color blindness, different equations apply depending on the type of atypical color vision and the degree of severity. For more information, please see http://www.w3.org/Graphics/atypical-color-response ---------------------------- Response from Working Group: ---------------------------- Thanks for the comments and suggestions. To take them each in turn: CL: change "luminosity" to luminance throughout. Since Web content doesn't provide any light output (HTML doesn't give off photons) we can't use the word "luminance" (which means light output). However 'relative luminance' is used in the literature for the concept we are describing and we are now using this. CL: change "The luminosity of a color is defined as" to "the luminance of an sRGB color is defined as". See above regarding luminance. And, we have switched to specifying that we are talking about sRGB in our equations. CL: change "blue RGB values" to "blue sRGB values" (the equation does not apply to other color spaces). Correct and we have done so. CL: Remove the exponentiation operator and the 2.2 gamma approximation. Instead, use the correct sRGB transfer curve. Done. Now uses the equations from the W3C document on sRGB. CL: Reference the sRGB specification. See the SVG 1.2Tiny specification for an example of how to reference it. Done CL: You may want to note that the equation given is only correct for typical color vision (the ISO standard observer). For atypical color vision, often incorrectly termed color blindness, different equations apply depending on the type of atypical color vision and the degree of severity. For more information, please see http://www.w3.org/Graphics/atypical-color-response. We have explained this briefly in our "Understanding" document. A longer exposition of this will be released in a paper (since it is too complicated to put into How to Meet SC 1.4.3 itself. The contrast ratios were set higher than normal and in a way to account for low vision and atypical color vision. The paper "Atypical colour response" has also been added as a resource. You can find the updated SC and definitions at http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/#visual-audio-contrast-contrast and http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/#visual-audio-contrast7 . The Understanding SC 1.4.3 and 1.4.5 documents can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20070517/#visual-audio-contrast-contrast and http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20070517/#visual-audio-contrast7 . ---------------------------------------------------------- Comment 2: Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/20060522155848.9BF2ADAE7D@w3c4-bis.w3.org (Issue ID: LC-581) Part of Item: Comment Type: TE Comment (including rationale for proposed change): "3.2.2 Changing the setting of any form control or field does not automatically cause a change of context (beyond moving to the next field in tab order), unless the authored unit contains instructions before the control that describe the behavior" Consider a user interface for a map, where form fields such as panning controls, layer selections or search boxes are used to zoom,pan, or alter a map. This common use seems to be precluded by the text above. Proposed Change: I regret not being able to suggest suitable text at this time. I can see the benefit of what you are trying to do, and I can see that it makes non-confomant some interfaces that are currently used. I think the text needs to be more precise, and look forward to discussing this further with you. ---------------------------- Response from Working Group: ---------------------------- User interfaces that allow the user to select different views of the same data cause changes in content, but not changes in context. Success Criterion 4.1.2 has been changed to require that user agents and assistive technology be notified of the changes in state produced by such changes in views.
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2007 23:29:27 UTC