- From: Detlev Fischer <fischer@dias.de>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:17:10 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Before anyone else points this out to me, I do it myself :-) The normative text of SC 1.4.3 already states clearly: "Text that is part of a logo or brand name has no minimum contrast requirement". Still, I believe the text in Understanding SC 1.4.3 could be clearer. Regards, Detlev Am 13.02.2012 11:52, schrieb Detlev Fischer: > Dear WCAG WG, > > "Contrast (Minimum): Understanding 1.4.3" has an exception for logos but > the current text is not terribly clear, especially as it mixes the > requirement for providing alternative text with contrast requirements: > > "Stylized text, such as in corporate logos, should be treated > in terms of its function on the page, which may or may not > warrant including the content in the text alternative. > Corporate visual guidelines beyond logo and logotype are not > included in the exception." > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html > > http://url.ie/e4hc > > The last sentence quoted seems to imply that everything *not* beyond > logo and logotype - i.e., the logo - actually qualifies for an exception > from SC 1.4.3, but this message would be clearer if the text would just > state: > > "SC 1.4.3 does not apply to corporate logos. Logos are established as > part of corporate or organizational histories. Their faithful > reproduction is essential for the recognition of the entity represented." > > ...or similar - *if* that is the actual position of the WCAG working > group. I believe that it is, but I am not certain. Please comment. > > One may add a 'nice to have' statement that new organisations or those > overhauling their corporate identity should strive to meet SC 1.4.3 (or > even SC 1.4.6?) in the desgin of their corporate logos. > > Regards, > Detlev > > >
Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 11:17:34 UTC