- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:07:52 -0500
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Cc: "WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi Alastair, Changing a 2.0 SC name may be controversial, I'm not sure. I like your backup suggestion and rationale. Thanks! Kind regards, Laura On Thu, Jul 2, 2020, 12:20 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > > Hi Laura, > > > I agree with John that the real minimum is Level A. > > Fair enough, good to have a fresh view! > > I'm unsure about "median" for the new AA criterion, but I also can't think of anything along those lines that feels right. > > Modifying the name of 2.4.7 is something I had veered away from, but it might be the neatest thing, e.g: > > * Level A: 2.4.7 Focus visible (Minimum) > * Level AA: 2.4.11 Focus visible > * Level AAA: 2.4.xx Focus visible (Enhanced) > > Floating that, but wondering if there will be howls of complaint about changing a 2.0 SC name...? (Or Michael might say it will break the spec?!) > > My backup suggestion is: > * Level A: 2.4.7 Focus visible > * Level AA: 2.4.11 Focus visible (Contrast) > * Level AAA: 2.4.xx Focus visible (Enhanced) > > The reasoning being that the new criteria brings in a contrast requirement, and the AAA one enhances that. > > Cheers, > > -Alastair
Received on Thursday, 2 July 2020 18:08:05 UTC