Re: Proposed wordsmithing for Contrast (Minimum) on interactive elements

Glenda,
I like the new wording with one exception. It is more concise and
structured.
The exception is the phrase "A mechanism is available". Borders and focus
is something the Author/Developer can fix. Until the browsers step up and
fix the default presentation of the form borders, I think authors must fix
the borders they can. To me "a mechanism is available" says the devs can
say border contrast is a user problem and they can fix them with user style
sheets or some other mechanism.

wording more in line with WCAG 1.4.3 would be better for me

Visual presentation of the following have a contrast ratio of at least
4.5:1 against the immediate surrounding background :


   - important (non-text) information in an interactive image;
   - input elements or the border(s) of input elements;
   - focus and select indicators;

except for the following which have a contrast ratio of at least 3:1.


   - disabled interactive elements;
      - thicker lines: where the minimum width of the line is at least 3px;
      - focus Indicators for an interactive logo image;



On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com> wrote:

> Oh wonderful LVTF,
>
> David MacDonald and Alastair Campbell have closely reviewed the proposed
> WCAG SC for Interactive Element Contrast (Minimum) at
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Contrast_(Minimum)
>
> And I think they have made a fabulous suggestion for rewording, that makes
> it easier to read (and understand) this proposed SC, while simulatenously
> maintaing all the of the meaning and intent.
>
> The current (long winded) wording is:
>
>
>    1. The visual presentation of important (non-text) information in an
>    interactive image has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 against the
>    immediate surrounding background.
>    2. The visual presentation of a disabled interactive element has a
>    contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against the immediate surrounding background.
>    3. The visual presentation of input elements or the border(s) of input
>    elements has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 against the immediate
>    surrounding background, except for the following:
>       - Medium Width Border for Input Elements: A medium width border (or
>       wider) for input elements has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against the
>       immediate surrounding background;
>    4. The visual presentation of focus indicators and selected indicators
>    has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 against the immediate surrounding
>    background, except for the following:
>       - Medium Focus Indicator: Medium focus indicator has a contrast
>       ratio of at least 3:1 against the immediate surrounding background;
>       - Medium Selected Indicator: Medium selected indicator has a
>       contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against the immediate surrounding
>       background;.
>       - Focus Indicator for an interactive logo image: Focus indicator
>       for an interactive logo image has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against
>       the immediate surrounding background.
>
> The rewording proposed by David MacDonald & Alastair Campbell is:
>
> A mechanism is available to ensure the visual presentation of the
> following have a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 against the immediate
> surrounding background :
>
>
>    - important (non-text) information in an interactive image;
>    - input elements or the border(s) of input elements;
>    - focus and select indicators;
>
> except for the following which have a contrast ratio of at least 3:1.
>
>
>    - disabled interactive elements;
>       - thicker lines: where the minimum width of the line is at least
>       3px;
>       - focus Indicators for an interactive logo image;
>
> I'm in 100% favor of changing the wording to what David/Alastair have
> proposed.  But before I do that, I wanted to give y'all a chance to give me
> feedback.  If you are in favor of this change, can you respond with +1?  If
> you are opposed...can you respond with a -1 and help us understand what you
> think would be better?
>
> Thanks much,
> G
>
> P.S.  I'll hold off on making this change on the wiki until Monday Nov
> 14th at noon central time.
>



-- 
Jim Allan, Accessibility Coordinator
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9264  http://www.tsbvi.edu/
"We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964