- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 18:51:34 +0000
- To: "WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <PR3PR09MB5347528325D03A2DD76E674CB9709@PR3PR09MB5347.eurprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Hi folks, During the meeting we discussed adjusting the perception interpretation paragraph to ignore ‘extraneous’ effects like shadow/glow. I’ve done a bit of checking in WCAG 2.1 for current definition, and tried to implement Gregg’s suggestion here: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2632/files That updates the note to: “What is perceived as the user interface component or sub-component (to determine enclosure or size) depends on its visual presentation. The visual presentation includes the component's visible content, border, and component-specific background. It does not include <a>decorative effects</a> emanating from the visible component such as shadows or glow effects.” The definition is then: <p>effects added to an element that are outside of the element and if removed do not change the ability to identify the element</p> <p class="example">Shadows or glow effects around a user interface control.</p> The question that occurs to me is: Why isn’t a background/border a decorative effect? I think the answer is: The border helps you identify the UIC, whereas a shadow doesn’t. Maybe? I’d appreciate any comments/suggestions as soon as possible please, we’re almost at the (this) finish line… -Alastair
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2022 18:52:35 UTC