Re: Should the boxes around blocks of text in the FPWD have Sufficient contrast under the new SC. WAS: Re: CFC: Publish WCAG 2.1 FPWD

Great test ! 


Where I see the difference — is 
between 
TYPE 1:  do something unless it is essential that you do not     (e.g. if you do this it breaks the page)
and
TYPE 2:  do this only to essential things   (you don’t need to do it to everything - just the essential things

they are quite different

It looks like all of the SC  (both old and new )  are type 1   (except 2.2.3  -where the exception is an exclusion to the exception — so that is an odd duck but still ok because not type 2




In WCAG 2   they are all the first type
1.4.9 Images of Text (No Exception)§AAA​ ​Images of text are only used for pure decoration or where a particular presentation of text is essential to the information being conveyed.
TYPE 1 
Here if you DO what we ask it will BREAK the purpose of the page (e.g.  it is a picture of John Hancocks signature — and changing it to plain text — well — you get the idea) (also if it is pictures of different fonts that you do not have on your computer) 
2.2.1 Timing Adjustable​ ​A​    - the ​Essential exception
TYPE 1
Again — you are removing the time limit (DO THIS UNLESS)  unless that breaks the function.  e.g. a race
2.2.3 No Timing§AAA​ ​Timing is not an essential part of the event or activity presented by the content, except for non-interactive synchronized media and real-time events.
This is actually saying that you cannot use “Essential” to get out of anything.  It basically says that there is no timing - and you can’t claim essential as an exception.   That is why this is a level AAA — because it cannot apply to all things.    If you did it would mean you cannot have timed anything.  No races,  no auctions, etc.    


On the new one 

The visual presentation of essential graphical objects for user interface component(s)
2.2.7 Animation from interactionsA
For significant animations triggered by a user action that is not an essential part of the action, there is a mechanism for the user to pause, stop or hide the animations while still performing the same action.
this is Type 1.    and OK.   (PS I think “part of the action”  should be changed to  “part of the function of xxxx”    you can’t say  “the action”  unless you first define what the action is - and I presume its not the ’user action’ or else ???? 
2.6.1 Device Sensors
All functionality of the content can be operated without requiring specific device sensor information unless the device sensor is essential for the function and not using it would invalidate the activity
this is type 1   and OK      ("and not using it would invalidate the activity" — is not needed.  That should be in the definition of “essential” already 
2.6.2 Orientation§
 Content is not locked to a specific orientation, and functionality of the content is operable in all orientations, except where orientation is essential for use of the content
Type 1  -   OK
3.1.7 Plain Language (Minimum) Essential exception: 
EXCEPTION: If the writing style is an essential part of the main function of the site, such as a game, a literary work, or teaching new terms
TYPE 1 - OK
3.2.6 Accidental Activation​ essential exception:  
EXCEPTION: Timing of activation is essential and waiting for the up-event would invalidate the activity.
TYPE 1 - OK
3.2.7 Familiar design essential Exception: 
EXCEPTION: The style is an essential part of the main function of the site, such as for a game
TYPE 1 - OK
This one is pretty vague though.  You might want to tighten up what ‘essential style’ means if you can



So I don’t see any problems with the way Essential is used in the old or new SC except where the criterion is vague.     (All use of essential has a bit of a problem and some will abuse it.  — and it will be hard to argue.  But good to have it on the table anyway).    But If something is too vague then it can weaken the whole set of guidelines but creating a point of valid criticism.    So I would try to strengthen anything that is not clear. 


Best 


Gregg






> On Feb 23, 2017, at 12:35 PM, Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com> wrote:
> 
> Essential is a normative part of the WCAG 2.0 definition.  I agree that it takes more thought to determine if something is essential or not.
> 
> My simple test is to just ask this, when a client says to me, "Oh, that is not essential.".  I say, "Cool.  Then can you remove it from the page?"  At that point, the client's eyes usually pop wide open...they stammer and say, "Well...ummm...no, it is really helpful."
> 
> To which I reply, "So, it is essential.  Now let's figure out how to make it accessible to all.  I'm sure we can come up with a universal design solution...if we just think creatively!"
> 
> So...yes, we might need to get hyper creative for complex graphics (like you might find in Tufte's "Visual Display of Quantitative Information" or the deliciousness that is David McCandless' Information is Beautiful http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/ <http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/> )
> 
> So...with the idea...that a picture truly is worth a thousand words, you can't just dismiss a data visualization as non-essential just because you threw a mountain of data at me.  It is the data viz that makes the data make sense!  
> 
> Elegant solution - designers can code version 1 of the data viz in any colors they want.  Doesn't even need to meet color contrast, as long as...there is a version of the data viz that does meet color contrast that is available.  My thought pattern...perhaps the designers will embrace the color contrast challenge and discover that the color contrast version is the only version they want to make...because it is better (you know...the whole "make it work for everyone from the start" kind of awesome.)
> 
> Yes, I'm respectful of the fact that designers may want to choose to post 2 versions of a data viz (one with less than ideal color contrast and one without)....I don't ever want to be the girl that took the color choices away from a designer.
> 
> Onwards!
> G
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> glenda sims    |   team a11y lead   |    deque.com <http://deque.com/>    |    512.963.3773      
> 
> web for everyone. web on everything. -  w3 goals
> 
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 9:31 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org <mailto:jjwhite@ets.org>> wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 10:05 AM
> > I would separate "X is essential to Y', from "essential" in the more general sense.
> >
> > At one end of the scale, this is quite specific:
> > "graphical objects that are essential for understanding"
> >
> > It is about an attribute of the content, not the user's goal or the pages's
> > purpose.
> > ​
> > For me, it gets shakey is when you have to make assumptions about what the
> > user (or site owner?) thinks is essential for that page. (Which Jason covered so I
> > won't expound on that.)
> [Jason] This is the right distinction to draw. I think "essential to an activity", when used as an exception to a requirement, is defensible in that it only applies to content that has a single, clear purpose which would be undermined by the requirement. For example, timing may be essential to certain activities, but the exception only applies where there is an unambiguous, intended purpose.
> For the reasons that we've discussed, I think broader uses of "essential", "critical", and similar terms are highly problematic.
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
> 
> 
> Thank you for your compliance.
> 
> ________________________________
>