Re: 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) - Advisory Technique for UI Controls

Hi Greg,

I agree with your statement that the text is key.  Actually, the issue that
got us thinking about adding an advisory technique was a design presented
to us that had UI controls  with no visible associated text.  The controls
did have alt text assigned in the HTML, but there was no visible text on or
adjacent to the controls on the page.  Further this was a monochrome design
where the UI controls were a shade of grey on a background that was a
slightly darker shade of grey.

I'm wondering if the new advisory technique should stipulate that it is for
cases where visible text is not on or adjacent to the control.  I'd be
interested in suggestions on wording for that.

Otherwise, I've updated the proposed advisory technique by specifying
"large text" per your comments on 3:1.

      Making user interface controls that meet the contrast provisions for
      large text






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:	Marc Johlic/Tampa/IBM@IBMUS
Cc:	"w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Date:	03/30/2011 03:39 PM
Subject:	Re: 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) - Sufficient Technique for UI
            Controls
Sent by:	w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org



For advisory that is OK

But I would make a note in the technique that it is not always possible to
have both the text on controls and the controls both meet the text
provision.   The text is key.  The controls do NOT need to be 4.5 to 1

Actually I think I would make the advisory be that the contrast is 3:1.
There is no 'font size' to controls === and you don't need that high a
contrast  (4.5) when it is not letters.

Also note that outlining can make things meet guidelines they otherwise
could not.


Gregg
-----------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering
University of Wisconsin-Madison

On Mar 30, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Marc Johlic wrote:



      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 <27968613.gif> 
 813-356-3081                                  Ability & Accessibility Center                
 * johlic@us.ibm.com               Follow us on ibm.com/able | <27536816.gif>                
                                             Facebook | <27793746.gif>Twitter                
                                                                                             



      <graycol.gif>Gregg Vanderheiden ---03/28/2011 05:58:59 PM---On Mar
      25, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Sailesh Panchang wrote: > ark,

      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.