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

Jim, Alastair, David, Jonathan Avila, et al

I agree!  I've just published (in the wiki) the David/Alastair version with
some additional Goodwitch and Avila modifications.

Jonathan, I"m not clear on the intent of the 3 seconds for allowing
temporary poor contrast.  Were you thinking 3 seconds "on load of a page"?
Or were you thinking of 3 seconds "on scrolling".  I'm just now sure how
the 3 seconds will work...I'm learning towards leaving out the temporary
exception.

G

glenda sims    |   team a11y lead   |    deque.com    |    512.963.3773


*web for everyone. web on everything.* -  w3 goals

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu> wrote:

> 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
>