- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 16:12:56 +0000
- To: "Niemann, Gundula" <gundula.niemann@sap.com>, David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2020 16:13:12 UTC
Hi Gundula, > 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. Agreed, but that is the point of the new criteria. There are lots of things that pass previous criteria that we are trying to tighten up. What you are pointing out would mean adjusting the supporting documentation for 1.4.1, but it wouldn't be a blocker for the new SC. Kind regards, -Alastair
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2020 16:13:12 UTC