RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Focus visible, plus?

+1

What I like about this is that titles for level A and AA are not changing and title on AAA feels right as we progress from A to AAA.

Thx,

ND
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de> 
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 2:17 PM
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>; WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Focus visible, plus?

How about:

Focus Visible
Focus Visible (Enhanced)
Focus Visible ( Strong Focus)

Sent from phone

> Am 02.07.2020 um 20:08 schrieb Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>:
> 
> 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 23:58:03 UTC