RE: Visual Indicators

Hello Alastair,

Basically, SC 1.4.1 in the Understanding, techniques and failure explains that an inline link is indicated sufficiently as a link, if its color contrasts to the color of surrounding text by at least 3.0:1. Of course underline is mentioned as a complying indication as well.
The point is, a link with a luminance difference as indication for its nature and without underline passes SC 1.4.1, while it would not pass the current wording of the SC on visual indication.
1.4.1<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-without-color> Use of Color: Color is not used as the only visual means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element. (Level A)

So the very same indication would show actionability according to SC 1.4.1, but not according to the new SC.
Therefore I think it overlaps.

Best regard,
Gundula


From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Sent: Mittwoch, 8. April 2020 19:28
To: Niemann, Gundula <gundula.niemann@sap.com>; David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Visual Indicators

> inline links are handled in SC 1.4.1, and the Success Criteria should be free of overlaps.

Hi Gundula,

I'm trying to understand the logic: 1.4.1 allows for contrast to be used as an indicator, but it does not "cover" inline links completely, and I don't think it overlaps.

The new SC doesn't mention or cover contrast / hue, it does mention underlines for inline links in the context of allowing them.

Could you point to the overlap, or explain the objection please?

Kind regards,

Alastair