Re: [WebAIM] Color of link text

But as said on the GutHub issue just now: fundamentally, this still goes 
against the idea of 1.4.1 ... you're still actually just using color to 
differentiate links from non-link text. Whether the contrast is high or 
not makes little difference, it's still a change in color, no? 
https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-without-color.html 
I don't see anything in the wording there to suggest that it's about 
using colors with a strong enough contrast...it quite unequivocally 
states "providing the information conveyed with color through another 
visual means ensures users who cannot see color can still perceive the 
information"

P

On 11/07/2016 15:59, David MacDonald wrote:
> I believe G183 requires BOTH the link text AND the static text to have
> minimum 4.5:1 with the background... BUT 3:1 with each other.
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd <http://twitter.com/davidmacd>
>
> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>
>
>
> /  Adapting the web to *all* users/
>
> /            Including those with disabilities/
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 7:01 AM, Patrick H. Lauke
> <redux@splintered.co.uk <mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>     FWIW I've filed an issue in WCAG's github repo about this:
>
>     https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/201
>
>     Thoughts/support there welcome.
>
>     P
>
>
>     On 10/07/2016 17:18, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>
>         On 10/07/2016 17:03, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
>             Great point Patrick
>
>             There are devices that do have HOVER (detect finger near
>             screen)  — but
>             not all devices do - and we can’t assume that they all will
>             any time
>             soon  (or perhaps not all ever).
>
>             So great reminder on this.
>
>
>         So we good with this idea of, first of all, patching G183 to exclude
>         touchscreen interfaces (and any other interfaces that lack
>         hover/focus)?
>         Should we take it straight to the WCAG WG, or work on something here
>         first before submitting a change proposal?
>
>                 In short, I'd say we should add a note to G183 saying
>                 that it does NOT
>                 apply to touchscreen input (without AT), since there's
>                 generally no
>                 concept of hover for touchscreen devices, and that focus
>                 is applied
>                 only after the user initiated an interaction/activation.
>
>
>         P
>
>
>
>     --
>     Patrick H. Lauke
>
>     www.splintered.co.uk <http://www.splintered.co.uk> |
>     https://github.com/patrickhlauke
>     http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
>     twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>
>


-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Monday, 11 July 2016 15:26:11 UTC