W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org > April 2017

Re: Should we drop the color bullet for now?

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:38:13 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOavpveFCQW_3STsBNT83d4QN=57=uNAwDU=5MRettM5Cy8wew@mail.gmail.com>
To: Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Thank you, Wayne!

On 4/26/17, Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
> We can drop it now for more research, but not permanently.
>
> It is not necessary to drop color, and it will help with  photophobia. The
> extent of photophobia was underestimated in 2.0. The Texas School for the
> Blind Table on Specific Eye Conditions shows otherwise. Photophobia
> accompanies blind spots. That means the need is solid.
>
> It is practical for enabling a choice of any distinguishable color pattern.
>
> Definition: A color pattern is distinguishable whenever a fully sighted
> user can distinguish text from background. (This is known, it depends on
> contrast. The research needed is to compute the formulae in papers to the
> W3C numbers.)
>
> Once we do this we can construct a formula for acceptable foreground /
> background color pairs (f, b) in rgb.
>
> Then testing works as follows:
>
> Pick a color pattern (f, b) that does not occur on your page.
> Test it.
> Does anything change using Alastair's script?
> Do controls or essential images disappear?
> Is the print readable.
> Now, Alastair doesn't include this step but I have found it useful.
> Reverse f and b. That is test with the foreground/ background pair (b, f).
> Look for the same stuff.
>
> More techniques will emerge as we test.
>
> Wayne
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Jonathan Avila
> <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
> wrote:
>
>> > So, should we drop the color bullet permanently?
>>
>> In my opinion SC 1.4.1 Color focuses on specific colors to communicate a
>> meaning.  More often we have situations where the difference in color is
>> used to communicate information.  For example, a difference in color
>> might
>> indicate selected state of a tab or a link -- it's not the color itself
>> --
>> it could be any color -- but the difference in color.  Other times the
>> difference in color might be used to communicate the focus state.  If
>> this
>> is already covered by SC 1.4.1 then we are ok -- if it is not then we
>> need
>> to have it.
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 9:14 AM
>> To: Repsher, Stephen J
>> Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf
>> Subject: Re: Should we drop the color bullet for now?
>>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> I think you are right for # 3 too.
>>
>> So, should we drop the color bullet permanently?
>>
>> Thoughts everyone?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Kindest Regards,
>> Laura
>>
>> On 4/25/17, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:
>> > Thanks for the comments, Laura.
>> >
>> > #1 would go back to techniques and failures then for Info &
>> > Relationships and/or Name, Role, Value.
>> >
>> > I can make an attempt at language for #2 and document on the wiki if
>> > others agree as well.
>> >
>> > For #3 I'm just having trouble understanding where, if color style is
>> > used alone to hide content, that is not just a failure of Contrast
>> > (Minimum) per WCAG 2.0.
>> >
>> > Thanks for helping my brain on #4 - I did not make the connection with
>> > the CSS important keyword.  I completely agree with your assessment.
>> >
>> > Steve
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 3:37 PM
>> > To: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>
>> > Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>;
>> > Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
>> > Subject: Re: Should we drop the color bullet for now?
>> >
>> > Hi Stephen,
>> >
>> > Good analysis. Thank you! My comments are inline.
>> >
>> >> 1. The author uses sprite taken from the background image.
>> >> In my opinion, I think outlawing sprites would be met with harsh
>> >> resistance.
>> >>  This is yet another loophole where the versatility of CSS is used to
>> >> create content, graying the lines with style.  The other major one
>> >> getting attention being icon fonts.  Again, this goes back to the
>> >> markup using role="img" so that user styles have a discriminating
>> >> selector.
>> >
>> > Agreed
>> >
>> >> 2. The author uses transparent images for controls that depend on the
>> >> pages background color for visibility I agree this is a highly
>> >> annoying one, and for other reasons than just user styles (e.g.
>> >> viewing a graphic on its own in order to zoom and remove
>> >> distractions).  I wonder if this couldn't just be covered in a very
>> >> simple SC of its own or be incorporated in Graphics Contrast?  A
>> >> simple statement saying that essential graphical objects should not
>> >> depend on colors outside the containing graphic for contrast should
>> >> suffice.
>> >
>> > Graphics Contrast seems to be a good fit.
>> >
>> >> 3. Items that are hidden with color become visible My gut is telling
>> >> me this would fail another SC, but maybe some examples would help.  I
>> >> don't think I ran across this too often in my user style days.
>> >
>> > I think we need to do some testing with Alatair's bookmarket unless
>> > someone has been collecting samples of these.
>> >
>> >> 4. Embedded color declarations that use important Wayne, I think this
>> >> thought is missing a word or two and I don't have any educated
>> >> guesses to complete it.  Could you fill us in?
>> >
>> > Users can override inline !important author CSS declarations. The
>> > thing is they have to do it at the same or higher specificity level,
>> > which necessitates users investigating an author's markup and
>> > carefully crafting rules to override it. Like sprites, I suspect an
>> > attempt to outlaw inline !important author CSS declarations would be
>> > met
>> with harsh resistance.
>> >
>> > Kindest Regards,
>> > Laura
>> > --
>> > Laura L. Carlson
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura L. Carlson
>>
>>
>


-- 
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 26 April 2017 15:38:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 27 April 2017 14:44:35 UTC