Re: CFC - Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation (Take 2)

My understanding of this is as follows - but the chairs have followed it more closely than I


If the artifact/element (in this case the browsers focus indicator) is not part part of the content, but rather the user agent, the author is not responsible for it
If the author does something to override the default Inteface compoe focus indicator (e.g. the author creates their own) then they are responsible for it.
Users who have difficulty with the default focus indicator on the browser, will have that same problem on all sites, and may (should) have some assistive technology or plug-in in there browser that would automatically make the focus indicators larger for them in a way that works for them. 
For this reason, it is not a good idea to override the default indicator or to try to create your own focus indicator that is more accessible unless you know what you're doing over there is a special reason for doing it. Having it is an option is a great idea. But not required. However preemptively overriding or providing an unconventional focus indicator may not be helpful.

Does that help? 


> On Aug 29, 2022, at 3:09 AM, Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com> wrote:
> 
> 0
> 
> I want to note though that I struggle with how the decision on the focus appearance user agent exception was made. Going by the most recent survey, there is no consensus that 2.4.11 Focus Appearance should fail when the browser default focus indicator has insufficient contrast & size. Even if the group is tied, I believe that should still have resulted in adopting the less restrictive of the two options. Going with "status quo" doesn't seem right. Status quo only came about from not having surveyed the group on the different options to begin with. This approach of "status quo" puts editors into the position of tie-breaker, which doesn't seem right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 7:21 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
>  
> 
> Call for Consensus – ends Tuesday August 30th at 2pm Boston time (a shorter time as this is take 2).
> 
>  
> 
> The Working Group has approved CFCs for all new normative content in WCAG 2.2 and it is ready to move to Candidate Recommendation.
> 
>  
> 
> The draft is at https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#new-features-in-wcag-2-2 <https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#new-features-in-wcag-2-2>
>  
> 
> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CFC deadline.
> 
>  
> 
> An outline of changes since the last CFC is below.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Several (proposed) WCAG 2.1/2.0 errata have been tackled. We also agreed to re-publish WCAG 2.1 so the errata will show up in the main spec, and we can tackle more of them before re-publication.
> 
> The Flash provisions have been updated.
> 
> The exception for Accessibility Authentication has been changed as part of the re-structuring (no change to meaning/requirement).
> https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#accessible-authentication-no-exception <https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#accessible-authentication-no-exception> 
> 
> Focus appearance: 
> The first line was updated to address the ‘persistence’ objection.
> The sub-components aspect was updated.
> The SC will be marked at risk due to complexity.
> We have added a note on interpreting the visual aspect for sizing, we’re just narrowing down the wording/terms on that currently.
> The user-agent survey was very balanced, so checking previous results on the same topic the chairs interpret the consensus view is to use the current exceptions, status quo.
> 
> Focus obscured: No change to the SC, but we are planning to add a cross-reference in the understanding document to focus-appearance for semi-opaque scenarios.
>  
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Wilco Fiers
> Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator ACT Task Force
> 
> 
> <deque_logo_180p.gif>