W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2017

Re: CFC - Graphics Contrast

From: James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 19:48:16 -0800
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <ABE947D3-0123-49C6-BB5C-E511A2EA3164@oracle.com>
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Can I ask whether the definition of state which was discussed is part of this CFC? If so I object to it. Requiring hover to have sufficient contrast ratio to non-hover states has no accessibility requirements behind it as far as I know and would unnecessarily limit color choices in an already limited palette. 

> On Nov 15, 2017, at 18:59, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:
> Call For Consensus — ends Friday, November 17th at 10:00pm Boston time.
> The Working Group has discussed a change to the Graphics Contrast and UI Component Contrast SC which will result in these SC being combined and clarified.
> The proposed wording for the Graphics Contrast SC is here: http://rawgit.com/alastc/wcag21/graphics-contrast/guidelines/#graphics-contrast. One objection has been raised about this wording, with the objector expressing concern that the “parts of graphics” phrase will result in additional cost to implementers, and as a result an editor’s note was added in order to help focus possible reviewer comments in the next Working Draft.
> Call minutes: https://www.w3.org/2017/11/15-ag-minutes.html#item01
> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.
> Thanks,
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe 
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk

Received on Thursday, 16 November 2017 03:48:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:18 UTC