Re: Proposed Final Design for W3C Technical Reports style in 2016

On 01/05/2016 09:43 AM, Jonathan Avila wrote:
> ØI'll gently push back on your assertion, as I believe it is the combination of text and underline - together as a visual
> whole - that signals to most readers that a link is indeed a link. In other words, it's not "  link text ", nor is it _______,
> but rather, the combination of the two: _link text_
>
> This is also something I’ve always had heartburn over as well.  That is sometimes meaning is communicated not by color itself
> but by the difference in luminosity.    Technique G183 for links indicate that links must be indicated differently on
> focus/hover from the surrounding text – but in theory this could be met simply by a focus rectangle by meeting SC 2.4.7 (if A
> and AA are applicable).
>
> A similar issue applies to change in background color on list items, page tabs, etc. that is focus and selection indication
> can be met by changing the background and thus communicate focus or selected state by the change in luminosity.  This change
> in luminosity may not be in the text but may be in the background.  In these cases SC 1.4.3 as written would not apply.   It’s
> unclear if SC 1.4.1 would apply in this case as it’s not color but the difference in luminosity. Technique G183 is mapped to
> SC 1.4.1 and not SC 1.4.3 – which makes me think SC 1.4.1 might be broader than just color but that’s not how it’s written.

Fwiw, the styles do add a background (and thicken the underline)
on :focus and :hover.

~fantasai

Received on Tuesday, 5 January 2016 22:53:23 UTC