Amendment to visual indicators

Hi All

Patrick and Detlev have raised concerns about thendefinition of
visual indicators that we should not try to be overly prescriptive on how
they look. COGA is mostly concerned that visual indicators to progress not
rely only on font type/size or spacing to indicator a control is necessary
to progress through a process. SO I've turned around the SC to mat the
approach used in the "Color alone
<>" SC.

It's the same requirements in the SC but now we wouldn't need to use or
define Visual indicators. It would need a new short name (i.e. "Process


Spacing, font type, and/or font size are not used as the only visual means
of conveying that controls are actionable if they are necessary to do the


   initiate a process <>

   progress through a process

   complete a process

   return to a previous part of a process

Exception: the control is part of a group of controls that has a visual
indicator for the group


David MacDonald

*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Mobile:  613.806.9005


GitHub <> <>

*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy

Received on Monday, 30 March 2020 15:08:10 UTC