W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > March 2014

Re: avoid "color contrast"

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 17:38:55 -0500
Message-ID: <5320E1FF.7070706@w3.org>
To: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org, Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org>
CC: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Hi Josh & all,

Actually, *the wording used throughout those WCAG pages* is "contrast ratio" and "luminance contrast".  "Color contrast" is only used once in the main text, and twice in the future techniques -- which EOWG assumed was just an oversight.

EOWG discussed the issue between the technically correct terminology used throughout WCAG (with minor exception), and the incorrect vernacular of "color contrast". For a couple of EOWG folks who know a lot about color &/or vision, this was a notable issue.

fyi, EOWG decided to use the correct terminology and also note the vernacular in <http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/preliminary#contrast>:
* Section heading: Contrast ratio ("color contrast")
* In the middle of the section: (This accessibility requirement is sometimes called sufficient "color contrast"; however, that is incorrect  technically it's "luminance contrast". On this page we use "contrast ratio" as short for "luminance contrast ratio" because it's less jargony.)

In conclusion, EOWG's comment to WCAG WG was to correct the couple of places where "color contrast" seemed to be a mistake. :)

Best,
~Shawn



On 3/12/2014 3:55 PM, Joshue O Connor wrote:
> Hi Shawn,
>
>> Please avoid the phrase "color contrast".
>
> <chair hat off>
> I'm happy to discuss this but it could be a big ask - essentially you are technically right but there is a common vernacular amongst developers and the term 'colour contrast' is well established as 'it' - largely based on the language traditionally used by WCAG it's worth noting.
>
> Also it's worth noting that even if light intensity is measured in lumens, and variations within RGB values represent (on screen) what we know as colour - as a 'cowpath' the term 'colour contrast' already has a lot of traction and common understanding so to switch now - or attempt to switch could create more dissonance than it is worth.
>
> My 2 cents
>
> Josh
>
>> Some places we've found it:
>> *
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html
>>
>> *
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20080430/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html
>>
>>
>> Additionally, several pages include "color contrast" in the Resources
>> listings. We wonder if it would be worthwhile to add a note there, e.g.,
>> something along the lines of what we have at
>> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/preliminary#contrast>: This accessibility
>> requirement is sometimes called sufficient "color contrast"; however,
>> that is incorrect  technically it's "luminance contrast"...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shawn for EOWG
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2014 22:39:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:17 UTC