RE: Focus not "obscured" to "overlapped"

Hi Alastair, I'm personally fine with whatever the group decides.

Jonathan

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 1:00 PM
To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>; WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Focus not "obscured" to "overlapped"

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Jon,

I think there's a choice here between:


  1.  "Obscured" doesn't define how much opacity would be ok, so theoretically it could be almost solid (but not quite). I don't think it would be caught by 1.4.11 or 2.4.11 because you can just scroll those into view. Focus-not-obscured is about the visibility as you tab to it.
  2.  "Overlapping" also doesn't say how much opacity would be ok, but I'd read that as opacity not mattering so you look at the overlap. At AA there can be some overlap, at AAA no overlap. Very transparent things (that are visibly 'ok') would fail.

So, we can close a hole and also catch a few (theoretical) things which actually aren't too bad. Or we can leave the hole and a let a few things through that are not very visible.

If people are not keen then we'll keep with the status quo.

Kind regards,

-Alastair


From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com<mailto:jon.avila@levelaccess.com>>
Date: Wednesday, 24 August 2022 at 14:35
To: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: RE: Focus not "obscured" to "overlapped"
I would think that overlapping is more strict because things can overlap but not be obscured or made opaque and in that case if they overlap and have no visual impact then it's not an issue but yet it could fail.  It seems if there is an opacity issue then it would be caught already by SC 1.4.11 or 2.4.11.    I'm just hesitant to make such a potentially impactful change at the last minute without considering the consequences but I would not object if the group believes this is better and safer.

Jonathan

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 7:59 AM
To: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: Focus not "obscured" to "overlapped"

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi everyone,

The last (very last, I hope) potentially normative issue on WCAG 2.2 is:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/2583

Summary: Is it leaving a hole that the component/indicator could be behind a semi-opaque layer?

If so, should we change the SC to talk about overlapping instead of obscuring?

E.g. When a <a>user interface component</a> receives keyboard focus, the component is not entirely overlapped by author-created content.

That means opacity doesn't figure into the scope, if it overlaps it overlaps.

That change is implemented in:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2634/files

Does that work? Any objections?

-Alastair