Re: Pre-CFC to go to CR (Please respond March 29th or early March 30th)

Hey Alastair,
I'm not sure what you're proposing. The PR says this:

    <p>When the keyboard <a>focus indicator</a> is visible, an area of the
focus indicator meets all the following:</p>
    <ul>
        <li>is at least as large as the area of a 1 <a>CSS pixel</a> thick
<a>perimeter</a> of the unfocused component or sub-component</li>
        <li>has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 between the same pixels in
the focused and unfocused states, and</li>

Why does the second item have ", and" at the end of it? Did you mean to
remove this, or is there a clause you didn't want to remove? I'm not sure
what you're planning to put to a vote.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 6:00 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> Hi Gundula,
>
>
>
> Historically, that’s the type of SC that we put at AAA. For example:
>
>    - Visual appearance requires selectable colours and a max-width for
>    text.
>    - Contrast (enhanced) has a stronger contrast requirement which
>    prevents a design from using colour (contrast) to differentiate links
>    (because you can’t get 3 way contrast), as well as many colour palates.
>    - Section headings requires, well, section headings.
>
>
>
> Anyone aiming for AAA will have other, long standing SCs that ‘hinder
> creative ideas’ [1].
>
>
>
> The way I’ve seen organisations using AAA criteria is on a more
> optional/aspirational basis, where they look at the requirement and see how
> they can support it in their context. If they decide to use a different
> indicator that doesn’t meet it (but they think is still good according to
> our guidance), they are free to do so.
>
>
>
> At AAA, the simpler we can make the SC, the more likely people are to use
> it.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
> 1] I don’t really agree that it is a hindrance, but there is a challenge
> of extra complexity.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Niemann, Gundula <gundula.niemann@sap.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 14:11
> *To: *Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, WCAG list (
> w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject: *RE: Pre-CFC to go to CR (Please respond March 29th or early
> March 30th)
>
> For focus appearance, I object to the stronger version as given in the PR,
>
> as it is not open for variations in designs, makes it hard for complex
> interactive pages to find a distinguishable pattern, and it hinders
> creative ideas.
>
>
>
> For target size, I agree.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Gundula
>
> ----------
>
> Dr. Gundula Niemann
>
> SAP PE UX Accessibility
>
> SAP SE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> *Sent:* Mittwoch, 29. März 2023 20:18
> *To:* WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Pre-CFC to go to CR (Please respond March 29th or early March
> 30th)
>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> This is a ‘pre-CFC’, highlighting the changes that will be put up for
> approval very soon. *Please let us know if you have revisions or
> objections before noon Eastern COB March 30th.*
>
>
>
> From the recent discussions on Target Size and Focus Appearance we have a
> plan, which is:
>
>    - Focus appearance moves to AAA, at risk.
>
>
>    - It is updated to a stronger, simpler version (see PR below).
>       - If that version is objected to during CR, we will fall-back to
>       the previous wording (minus the 1st set of bullets).
>       - If both versions are objected to during CR, we will remove it.
>
>
>    - Target size is updated, at risk.
>
>
>    - The ‘circles’ method is used for the spacing exception.
>       - The mention of ‘lists’ in the inline exception is removed but is
>       addressed in the understanding document.
>       - If the circles method is objected to during CR, we will fall-back
>       to the previous wording.
>
>
>
> The fall-backs are subject to discussion with W3C management, but if we
> can’t use this plan, we will come back with another.
>
>
>
> The changes are in this PR:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3123/files
> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fpull%2F3123%2Ffiles&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7Cfceea379c0ed40f5915e08db312046f1%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638157786929665860%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=qx40NaHHHhAbpYYAgAJhU3HxfbQXr0EWWAYKptGwptE%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> If this is approved, the understanding documents for both will need
> updating, but that is not part of this PR/change.
>
>
>
> The responses to these proposals have been positive, so we are looking for
> objections / adjustments before we go to CFC.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> @alastc / www.nomensa.com
> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nomensa.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7Cfceea379c0ed40f5915e08db312046f1%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638157786929665860%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BLt6M4AA0Jm1U4uAMhPU3h%2FOnnQDpIKExD%2BJYCC3%2Blk%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>


-- 
*Wilco Fiers*
Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator
ACT Task Force