- From: James O'Leary via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 22:52:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
In the discussion re: charged language about WCAG 2.1 being broken, there's a category error occurring. Contrast measures are for a11y, guaranteeing legibility for the population. Both the article and Chris mention which is more legible for them, while noting they have normal color vision. In that case, the exercise is "which has more contrast for viewers with full vision" This is _very_ different from the goal of an a11y standard: covering the population. To do that, you need a story for how you're handling the ~10% of users with skews in perception of hue and chroma (some can't see it entirely!) who aren't going to see as much difference as you are. Additionally, this falls far short of the standard scientific approach I've seen to measuring this, reading speed. This, in addition to the last leg of severely broken being one has a larger gamut of dark colors that pass, the other has a larger gamut of light colors passing[1] is worrisome to me. There seems to be a significant gap in things that are simpler to understand, but harder to talk about it. [1] this is a weak argument because this is a relative judgement, and frankly, the fact APCA neither explicitly models flare, nor does its delta L behavior show it reflecting that white cant get lighter but black can lighter in the presence of flare, make APCA the one that has worrisome behavior if I had to pick one. Even though I love it and can't wait for it to be a standard! -- GitHub Notification of comment by jpohhhh Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7357#issuecomment-1180996983 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 11 July 2022 22:52:11 UTC