RE: Do icons fall under - 1.3.3 question for shapes/icons alone that are used everywhere now but were not back in 2008

> Following that rationale, you could also say that things such as color contrast don't have to be set correctly, as a user could have tools to override any page-defined colors, no?

I have brought this up before as well and this really scares me.  That is -- technically this is already available so a user in theory if they had access to customize the styles and had the skills necessary could customize the page and thus SC 1.4.3 would not be needed.  But in practical reality this would be too difficult, confusing, and would mean that users would have to totally change the intended visual experience of a page just to get a minimum level of sufficient contrast.  IMO Users' shouldn’t have to go to such lengths just to have a minimum contrast level on text.  Forcing all pages to use a custom style sheet even for just contrast would push a large number of people into pages that all look the same in color and contrast creates a separate but equal scenario I am not in favor of.

You could also say users who rely on visual labels could run a style sheet to pull the accessible name out of the field and display it visually before the field -- so with that thinking we could gut many criteria from WCAG as well.  There needs to be a balance between  freedom of design and some basic visual accessibility.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group 
jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
703.637.8957 (Office) 
Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | Linkedin | Blog
Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars!


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 5:01 PM
To: GLWAI Guidelines WG org
Subject: Re: Do icons fall under - 1.3.3 question for shapes/icons alone that are used everywhere now but were not back in 2008

On 20/04/2016 20:33, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

>> In short, a sighted user basically has to rely on the latter, some 
>> form of additional plugin/extension, as per:
>>
>>>  * A plug in AT (or other AT) can expose the label without having to
>>>    focus on them.
>
> Correct.  Just like blind users need to rely on some sort of screen reader.
>
> WCAG makes sure the content is or can be made accessible by the user 
> with their tools.

Following that rationale, you could also say that things such as color contrast don't have to be set correctly, as a user could have tools to override any page-defined colors, no?

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke

http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com

twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Monday, 25 April 2016 18:42:36 UTC