W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2020

Re: WCAG 2.2 status - Visual indicators

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:33:05 +0000
To: "Abma, J.D. (Jake)" <Jake.Abma@ing.com>, WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
CC: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, Rachael Bradley Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>
Message-ID: <5BBE2925-BAC1-464C-8660-3383DB7A1294@nomensa.com>
Hi Jake,

For visual indicators, we have a discussion going about whether we should be assessing against the current text, or whether we need to take a step back and gather examples in general. (See yesterday’s email.)

I think MichaelG raised the overlap aspect as well, perhaps we should take out the contrast aspect of Visual Indicators as it overlaps with non-text contrast?

I hadn’t done that before because I had not thought through whether the overlap was exact, or whether it would pick up different things.

However, if it causes confusion in this task, let’s take it out.

> Where to add comments on examples?

In the doc. I’ve just updated it to clarify that contrast is not part of this task. Anyone can add comments in the cells after each example. I just signed mine, let’s separate with a couple of dashes between comments.

However, I think it would be useful to catchup on yesterday’s email about this.


From: "Abma, J.D. (Jake)"

I tend to disagree with the checkbox example used for this potential SC, it's pure about contrast, not visual indication. So I would pass it.

The checkbox itself is enough (pass visual indicator), the contrast is not OK (fail contrast) , would not like to see these blend together when testing.

Where to add comments on examples?
From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2020 11:07 AM
To: WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cc: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>; Rachael Bradley Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>
Subject: WCAG 2.2 status - Visual indicators

Hi everyone,

Another SC-specific follow up, this one on Visual indicators.

There are two variations of this, for which the ‘active’ one (where it affects how you design components) is preferred if we can get it right.

The core need is to be able to identify interactive components and know what to do with them, which affects everyone to some degree, but some people with cognitive impairments to a massive degree.

The problem in crafting an SC for this is capture problematic instances, and not capture instances that are not problematic. With something so context dependant, it is difficult!

To provide confidence that the SC works we really need to catalogue plenty of examples. E.g. A list of different UI components and whether they should pass, and whether they do pass according to the SC text.

David started that off in the document, but I thought a landscape orientation would help so I’ve separated that off and done two examples to kick things off:


This SC won’t progress without a few people contributing so that we have a robust set of examples demonstrating how to meet (or fail) the SC.

Kind regards,


SC /understanding doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WhZAbswvPHs7A3stfqM_ATsaBHPeGbHtARcmaKMck1U/edit#heading=h.ck57f2kxzytg

Survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Visual_indicators/

Minutes: https://www.w3.org/2020/01/07-ag-minutes.html#item05

Previous minutes: https://www.w3.org/2019/12/17-ag-minutes.html#item03



The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use or disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the message immediately.

Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2020 09:33:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:34 UTC