- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 11:03:50 +0100
- To: Gavin Thomas <Gavin.Thomas@uwe.ac.uk>
- Cc: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, IG - WAI Interest Group List list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Gavin Thomas <Gavin.Thomas@uwe.ac.uk> wrote: > Say I have a link that is only visually evident from colour alone (has > contrast ratio of at least 3:1) but that changes colour and shows an > underline on focus this would meet > > G183: Using a contrast ratio of 3:1 with surrounding text and > providing additional visual cues on focus for links or controls where color > alone is used to identify them > > F73 states: > > Note 1: If the non-color cue only happens when the mouse hovers over the > link or when the link receives focus, it is still a failure. > > So this is clearly a failure (and a contradiction of g183) I think you're misunderstanding something here. F73 fails content where you cannot visually distinguish links from non-links. G183 is a technique where you visually distinguish links by using a sufficient contrast ratio that the user does not need good color vision. F73 Note 1 is saying that if you can only visually distinguish links from non-links on hover/focus, it's still a failure. But if you follow G183, then you have visually distinguished links even when not hovered/focused, so you wouldn't fail. G183 should be read as saying that even when links are unfocused, you must use a contrast ratio of 3.1, *and* when they are focused, you must also use additional visual cues. That's as opposed to reading it as not imposing a requirement on unfocused links. Does that make sense? -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 10:04:21 UTC