- From: Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 10:42:25 -0700
- To: Bruce Bailey <Bailey@Access-Board.gov>
- Cc: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <OF6C637AF2.23512277-ON882583DE.005FEC12-882583DE.006140CD@notes.na.collabserv.c>
Bruce, I reviewed for A and AA, and had a few requests/questions. Can you please add a comment to the document explaining why On Input is listed "no" for Invisible while On Focus is "yes". Given 4.1.2 exists for custom components as per the SC's note, I do not think it is reasonable to use the rationale that standard HTML components already meet this SC to mark it "easy". It is theoretically easy to add aria, but can involve effort. So I'm not sure whether or not it should be marked easy, but I'm not comfortable with the reason given. Can you please add a note explaining why Contrast (minimum) is marked as not essential while Non-text Contrast is marked essential? I suspect it is to do with a user's ability to transform text through an AT, but it would be good to note that. I would say that Status Messages needs some adjusting. It would say it is easy and also invisible. The text already exists in the UI; the SC merely requires it be programmatically flagged to AT, so it does not alter the UI at all (and therefore invisible). The fix is easy to implement - just add a role or aria-live attritube. Thanks for the work! Michael Gower Senior Consultant in Accessibility IBM Design 1803 Douglas Street, Victoria, BC V8T 5C3 gowerm@ca.ibm.com cellular: (250) 661-0098 * fax: (250) 220-8034 From: Bruce Bailey <Bailey@Access-Board.gov> To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Date: 2019-04-16 07:51 AM Subject: RE: Minutes 9 April 2019 Thanks Jonathan, that is a good catch! I have made that change and adjusted the corresponding tally count. FWIW, I did not include 2.1 SC in the tally count because I found that I was much less confident about my ratings for those SC. -- Top posted for my convenience. From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2019 10:58 AM To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Subject: RE: Minutes 9 April 2019 Thanks for putting this together Bruce. I’d say SC 1.4.1 is not invisible because it isn’t just about providing behind the scenes alternatives for use of color – but visible alternatives to color for folks with color perception conditions who can see. Jonathan From: Bruce Bailey <Bailey@Access-Board.gov> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2019 3:16 PM To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Subject: RE: Minutes 9 April 2019 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. On the call, I volunteered to update the tally of SC as being Essential, Easy, and/or Invisible. I have completed a first pass on that which you can find in the wiki here: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.x_Priority_levels_discussion Feedback is much appreciated. I think I addressed the questions and concerns raised by JF and Glenda on the survey.
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2019 17:42:58 UTC