Re: CFC - Graphics Contrast

+1

Ok - that does clarify. The state definition does not seem to have the 
implications I am concerned about in this particular SC.


On 11/16/2017 12:02 AM, Alastair Campbell wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Hi James,
>
> I don’t think that was discussed directly, but in order for that to be 
> an issue the controls in different states would have to be adjacent, 
> i.e. touching. Even without a mention of states, I think that would be 
> an issue in current WCAG conformance.
>
> There was some discussion about whether ‘existing’ was a state, and 
> people thought that wasn’t clear so ‘boundaries’ was added:
>
> “Visual information used to indicate states and boundaries of active 
> user interface components”
>
> (Still with the intent that if it isn’t there, you don’t have to add 
> something.)
>
> Does that help?
>
> -Alastair
>

-- 
Regards, James

<http://www.oracle.com> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
Phone: +1 650 506 6781 <tel:+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415 987 
1918 <tel:+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com 
<sip:james.nurthen@oracle.com>
Oracle Corporate Architecture
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
<http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing 
practices and products that help protect the environment