Clarify a possible contradiction in the text link requirement

Name: Jay Bellew
Email: jason.bellew@gmail.com
Affiliation: 
Document: W2
Item Number: (none selected)
Part of Item: 
Comment Type: question
Summary of Issue: Clarify a possible contradiction in the text link requirement
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
Hi Folks, I've found a possible contradiction on these two pages related to the requirement for styling text links.  Basically my question is if text links have the suggested 3:1 contrast with the plain text and no underline, and showed underline on hover and focus...would that be a pass or a fail?

Reference pages:
https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/F73

"While some links may be visually evident from page design and context, such as navigational links, links within text are often visually understood only from their own display attributes. Removing the underline and leaving only the color difference for such links would be a failure because there would be no other visual indication (besides color) that it is a link."


https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/G183.html

"With this technique, a relative luminance (lightness) difference of 3:1 or greater with the text around it can be used if additional visual confirmation is available when a user points or tabs to the link. Visual highlights may, for example, take the form of underline, a change in font style such as bold or italics, or an increase in font size."

Proposed Change:

Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2021 21:20:30 UTC