RE: Contrast on W3C site

Wonderful John!

 

Susan, be sure to let your client know that she was not alone in her discovery, and the contrast issue is being addressed. We and the W3C appreciates her noticing and your bringing yet another opportunity to improve accessibility of the W3C site to our attention. 

 

​​​​​She should see the changes by March 1st.

 

My one question is this: will these CSS changes be applicable to the website overall? Not just the spec pages, right?

 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea 
Senior Accessibility SME (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 |  <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA |  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545

 

From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 1:52 PM
To: 'Katie Haritos-Shea' <ryladog@gmail.com>; 'Léonie Watson' <lwatson@paciellogroup.com>; 'fantasai' <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org; 'Susan Hewitt' <susan.hewitt@deque.com>; 'Charles McCathie Nevile' <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Subject: RE: Contrast on W3C site

 

Hi all,

 

Yes, it appears that the feedback was taken in and acted upon (thanks Fantasai!). 

 

The only potential issue I found that still remains (regarding color contrast) is with the 2.2.4 Advisement Boxes, where it’s a bit touch-and-go: the font-size _appears_ to be unchanged from the default 16 pt. , and where the faux heading is #b35f00 (per the CSS) on a #b35f00 background. This creates a contrast ratio of 4.03:1, which fails “regular” text, but passes “large text”. I’d like to see that ‘heading’ text made either bold or increased to 18pt., but outside of that the new design appears to be quite good with regard to contrast after the reported changes were made.

 

HTH

 

JF

 

From: Katie Haritos-Shea [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 12:33 PM
To: Léonie Watson <lwatson@paciellogroup.com <mailto:lwatson@paciellogroup.com> >; John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com <mailto:john.foliot@deque.com> >
Cc: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-eo@w3.org> ; Susan Hewitt <susan.hewitt@deque.com <mailto:susan.hewitt@deque.com> >; Gmail Account <ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> >; Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru <mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru> >
Subject: RE: Contrast on W3C site

 

Thanks Leonie!

John, 

Do you know if your recommendations for improved contrast were taken up for the new spec document requirements? (I can't recall the name of that initiative at the moment).

See above for context...

Katie Haritos-Shea
703-371-5545

On Feb 19, 2016 1:28 PM, "Léonie Watson" <lwatson@paciellogroup.com <mailto:lwatson@paciellogroup.com> > wrote:

Katie,

 

The notification I sent out today to the Web Platform WG relates to the introduction of the new style sheets, yes. They will be automatically turned on for those specifications using either Bikeshed or Respec, on 1st March. It will be a manual switch for all other specs.

 

This said, I don't know whether the colour contrast is improved in the new style sheets. I believe JF gave feedback to the group working on the new CSS though, so he may have a better idea.

 

HTH

Léonie.

 

From: Katie Haritos-Shea [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ] 
Sent: 19 February 2016 18:21
To: Susan Hewitt <susan.hewitt@deque.com <mailto:susan.hewitt@deque.com> >; Léonie Watson <lwatson@paciellogroup.com <mailto:lwatson@paciellogroup.com> >
Cc: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-eo@w3.org> ; Gmail Account <ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> >
Subject: Re: Contrast on W3C site

 

Actually Susan,

I think this is currently being addressed via new stylesheet requirements being put in place right now.

Leonie, 

Is this related to the new that just went out from you?

Katie Haritos-Shea
703-371-5545 <tel:703-371-5545> 

On Feb 19, 2016 12:50 PM, "Susan Hewitt" <susan.hewitt@deque.com <mailto:susan.hewitt@deque.com> > wrote:

Hi folks,

 

I just had a client point out that the W3C site is not meeting color contrast requirements - specifically the view links at the top of the page. The grey on grey background of those definitely do not. Is there some WCAG exception which applies to the use here?

 

The client is really bucking the need to meet 1.4.3 and having them show a W3C violation is not helping my case.

 

https://www.w3.org/Consortium/

 

Thoughts?

Susan

-- 

susan hewitt

senior accessibility specialist 

deque systems | 703-623-8717 <tel:703-623-8717>