Re: Browser default focus indicators and SC 2.4.7

correct

There was much discussion about this at the time. The desire was to require that the focus indicator the “very visible". But there was no quantitative measure we could think of for indicator visibility. Also, it often is under the control of the content provider.

Even in TEITAC where the guidelines did cover software we were unable to come up with a measurable criterion for “visible”. The result was that the item was still left in as “visible” so that advisory techniques could be attached to it, and to bring it to people’s attention, but it is pretty hard to fail that one since the only requirement is that it be “visible” and nobody makes a focus indicator that isn’t “visible”.

Gregg




On Apr 28, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:

> http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140311/G165
>  
> This technique isn’t to suggest that an author may not be able to offer something better, but that the default is acceptable in the view of the working group that authored the technique. 
>  
> AWK
>  
> From: Terrill Thompson [mailto:tft@uw.edu] 
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 10:47 AM
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Browser default focus indicators and SC 2.4.7
>  
> Is relying on the browser's default focus indicator sufficient to meet SC 2.4.7 (focus visible)? 
> 
> Given that the default focus indicator in certain browsers is very difficult to see, 
> it seems to me that if web developers do nothing, their page could be said to fail on visible focus. 
> 
> However, lately I've been hearing more recommendations that it's best to just leave the browser's default focus indicator alone, based on the premise that some browsers do this well, and changing the default display messes with users' expectations. 
> 
> Opinions?
> 
> --- 
> Terrill Thompson
> Technology Accessibility Specialist
> DO-IT, Accessible Technology Services
> UW Information Technology
> University of Washington
> tft@uw.edu