- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lguarino@adobe.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 12:45:23 -0700
- To: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
- cc: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Joe, I've appended the current draft of Checkpoint 1.5. Only when we get to Level 3 does the checkpoint "ban" text content over background images. At Level 1, it is sufficient if your User Agent lets you control the display of the background image. The largest problem with text over background images isn't that the author designed it with poor contrast in the first place (although colorblindness considerations can make this more of a challenge). But when a user needs to configure the text and background colors, the configured text color may no longer provides sufficient contrast with the background image. This checkpoint is trying to make it possible for that class of users to read the text. Loretta Checkpoint 1.5 Ensure that foreground content is easily differentiable from background for both auditory and visual presentations. Success criteria You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.5 at the Minimum Level if: 1.text content that is presented over a background image or pattern is implemented using mechanisms that allow the user to display the text without the background image or pattern. You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.5 at Level 2 if: 1.when text content is presented over a background image or pattern, the text is easily readable when the page is viewed in 256 grayscale. You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.5 at Level 3 if: 1.text content is not presented over a background image or pattern OR the text is easily readable when the page is viewed in black and white (no grayscale). 2.audio content does not contain background sounds OR the background sounds are at least 20 db lower than the foreground audio content. 3.text content is not presented over a background image or color OR the colors used for the text and background or background image pass the following test (from Techniques For Accessibility Evaluation And Repair Tools, dated April 26, 2000): <<details of the test omitted>>
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:45:47 UTC