- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:46:03 +0000
- To: "josh@interaccess.ie" <josh@interaccess.ie>
- CC: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <DB22D2C4-F054-44CD-93C5-46676AD83E18@nomensa.com>
Hi Josh, There has been some work on it on the LVTF, you might remember from TPAC the discussion about how to define the things that need contrast, without mandating borders etc. The current proposal is here: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Contrast_(Minimum) I haven’t looked at that one much yet (been focused on sizing and reflow), but my impression is that we need to think about what ‘it’ is contrasting with… Cheers, -Alastair On 02/11/2016, 10:40, "josh@interaccess.ie" <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote: >Something like "The visual presentation of text, images of text, and the different states of interface elements >has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1, except for the following: (Level AA)" > >And perhaps include an extra note about being able to distinguish BETWEEN different states of an interface >element too (but not sure if this would mean that there needs to be a 4.5:1 ratio between, say, selected and >unselected buttons for instance?) Going in the right direction - I like calling out 'states' but aren't there also the need to have the components themselves perceivable? Say scrollbars for example that don't change state? In terms of states we could define ratios for active/inactive for sure. Thanks Josh
Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2016 10:46:40 UTC