- From: Marc Johlic <johlic@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:12:41 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF70618653.E747334E-ON85257863.0066D5E5-85257863.00698856@us.ibm.com>
Thanks for the feedback on this. Given the responses and some brief
discussion on last week's WCAG Working Group call, I would like to hear if
there are any objections to adding the following as an Advisory Technique
to 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum):
Making user interface controls that meet the contrast provisions for
text
Regards,
Marc Johlic
Accessibility Consultant
Human Ability & Accessibility Center, IBM Research
( (T/L) 391-5905 | External For self-help visit us at the IBM Human
813-356-3081 Ability & Accessibility Center
* johlic@us.ibm.com Follow us on ibm.com/able | Facebook |
Twitter
From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
To: Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org, Marc
Johlic/Tampa/IBM@IBMUS
Date: 03/28/2011 05:58 PM
Subject: Re: 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) - Sufficient Technique for UI
Controls
Sent by: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
On Mar 25, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Sailesh Panchang wrote:
ark,
However, we still run into problems with developers on their
active UI >components because they are quick to point out that
the techniques state >"text or images of text". Therefore their
UI controls (or icons) are exempt >from 1.4.3 because they do
not have any text associated with them.
Well in reality these active UI elements fail SC 1.1.1 . They are
non text elements that have no text equivalents. How is a non-visual
user supposed to understand what they are? So the UI elements need
to comply with SC 1.1.1 first, then evaluated for SC 1.4.3 (contrast)
and SC 2.4.7 (visual focus indicator).
No problem with WCAG 2 there.
But I do not understand why "inactive controls that are not visible
to anyone" figure in the text of SC 1.4.3 under exceptions. If it is
not visible then how does contrast matter?
My contention is that SC 1.4.3 and SC 2.4.7 should be elevated to
Level A status. I see quite a few transgressions of these SC. There
are no readily available and workable fixes via features of the
browser / assistive technology for these two SC. In fact some users
who do not use AT may encounter these issues. The fixes have to be
done by Web content developers. I'll be happy to learn if this is
incorrect.
Sailesh Panchang
Director, Accessibility Services
www.deque.com
Tel 571-449-3576
Hi Sailesh
Some quick notes that may help with this.
RE: 1.4.3 and "inactive controls that are not visible to anyone
There is no exception for "inactive controls that are not visible to
anyone". I think you are reading the provision wrong.
Incidental: Text or images of text that are part of an inactive user
interface component, that are pure decoration, that are not visible
to anyone, or that are part of a picture that contains significant
other visual content, have no contrast requirement.
should be read as
Incidental: Text or images of text
- that are part of an inactive user interface component,
- that are pure decoration,
- that are not visible to anyone, or
- that are part of a picture that contains significant other visual
content,
have no contrast requirement.
The "not visible to anyone" is there because sometimes people will put
white text on white background to add text that is visible to screen
readers users only. or for other reasons. This simply says that contrast
rules do not apply to that text.
RE: Elevating SC
- that is not possible anymore. The WCAG 2.0 has been released and cannot
be changed.
RE work arounds
--- The text is programmatically determinable so it can be rendered in high
contrast if needed using a plug in or special AT.
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: 27536816.gif
- image/gif attachment: 27793746.gif
- image/gif attachment: 27968613.gif
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 19:16:04 UTC