- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 07:31:25 -0500 (EST)
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- cc: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
This seems like a reasonable proposal for the current techniques document actually. Charles McCN On Sat, 30 Dec 2000, Kynn Bartlett wrote: At 09:51 AM 12/30/2000 , Sean B. Palmer wrote: >(Hakon:) >Use numbers, not names, for colors >Color names also vary from one platform to another. CSS supports 16 color >names: aqua, black, blue, fuchsia, gray, green, lime, maroon, navy, olive, >purple, red, silver, teal, yellow, white. Some browsers have chosen to >support additional color names, but there is no definite list. I suggest instead that we update the requirement (when it becomes part of a WCAG 2.0 CSS techniques document) to state "use the 16 named colors defined by CSS level 1, or use RGB colors" instead of just using RGB colors. I think those 16 should be considered a reasonably safe list and I don't think that access problems will result (which can't be eliminated by turning off CSS!) if those are used. I find a prohibition against using 'color: black' or 'background: white' to be absurd. --Kynn -- Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia until 6 January 2001 at: W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Sunday, 31 December 2000 07:31:28 UTC