From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com] Sent: 22 February 2016 19:20 "The fact that a TF that is looking specifically at issues related to Low Vision users (or Cognitive users, or Mobile users – which sort of is everybody) helps bring focus to those types of needs, and ensures that the next-gen WCAG addresses shortcomings that specifically affects that group, but I will suggest that increasing the contrast requirements [sic] will benefit not only LV users, but perhaps Mobile users and Seniors as well, so making it a “Low Vision” Success Criteria in name feels (to me) wrong." +1 I think it will also cause confusion. The 2.0 SC is intended to provide sufficient contrast for people with low vision. If an extension SC provides a better recommendation, it will effectively render the original SC obsolete. Updating guidance is progress and is a good thing (in many respects it's already long overdue), but trying to have conflicting SC exist in the same time/space seems like we're asking for trouble. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
Received on Monday, 22 February 2016 22:18:35 UTC