W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2019

RE: Proposed amendment to 1.4.11 for WCAG 2.2

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 12:32:28 +0000
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DBBPR09MB30453DE31A50C1103DE17952B96F0@DBBPR09MB3045.eurprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Hi David,

It is a little hard to draw directly from a study like that, which “investigated whether and how mental fatigue affects selective attention in visual processing by examining differences in processing of task relevant versus task irrelevant information.”

It seems straightforward to argue that a busier interface is more likely to include irrelevant stuff (for any particular task), and that would have an impact on some people with cognitive issues more than others.

However, in the context of a component which might have multiple states, are those states relevant or irrelevant? It’s an impossible question to answer.

Andy wrote:
> Does “visual info required…all their states” imply that all states must be distinguishable from each other?

No, that’s the opposite of what it’s trying achieve, which is to say the component should maintain its contrast across states. E.g. hovering over something should not make it disappear (from a contrast point of view).

I wouldn’t panic about hidden states either, as by definition they have no visual information.

Adding “required for understanding the functionality of the component.” Could add requirements, I’d rather focus on the “Visual information required to identify user interface components” and provide more examples for that.

When we were discussing it, it was aimed at things like the check in a checkbox (which have an adjacent color), rather than things like visited links (which generally don’t).


Received on Saturday, 19 October 2019 12:32:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:32 UTC