- From: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 09:43:42 -0400
- To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
- Cc: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, Wayne Dick <waynedick@knowbility.org>, IG - WAI Interest Group List list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Jonathan / Greg, Sorry you are mis-reading my first post: I said: "So I do not think disabling CSS to do away with poor contrast on the focus indicator will make it pass 2.4.7" I raised this question "Poor contrast on focus indicator: SC 2.4.7 failure? " with a hope of hearing from Wayne based on his remarks: "New Fail Case 1 restores 1194.22(d) of the current 508, which has been lost in the 508 Refresh. The author's visual presentation must be removable". I understand para (d) refers to use of user defined style sheets, yet in his test case, I do see a statement that says "2. From the Firefox menu take View > Page Style > No Style". My words "disabling CSS" is used in the above context. Maybe my email was unclear to you because I started another thread after reading Wayne's post. Coming back to my question: Yes, knowledgeable content authors may use CSS to enhance browser's default focus indicator if it is weak. That's good. But consider a case where the default focus indicator is passable. Now if the content author styles the background / foreground colors in a manner that introduces poor contrast and as a result, the focus indicator is no longer clear. It is not the browser's fault but a CSS / author-introduced issue. So is it alright to fail poor contrast on the focus indicator under SC 2.4.7? Thanks, Sailesh On 5/25/15, Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org> wrote: > Ah > OK > > (Disabling CSS is not a good method for creating a visible indicator at any > rate. The default focus indicator is pretty faint). > > Thanks Jonathan - agree > > gregg > > ---------------------------------- > Gregg Vanderheiden > gregg@raisingthefloor.org > > > > >> On May 25, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> >> wrote: >> >> Ø What did you have in mind with disabling CSS for a more visible focus >> indicator? >> >> Gregg, Sailesh was the one who mentioned it – but my comment was meant to >> indicate that I would be opposed to requiring the user to disable CSS in >> order to make a site WCAG conformant. That is some people might try to >> make claims of conformance for contrast by saying it can be met when you >> turn off CSS. >> >> Jonathan >> >> -- >> Jonathan Avila >> Chief Accessibility Officer >> SSB BART Group >> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com <mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> >> >> 703-637-8957 (o) >> Follow us: Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/#%21/ssbbartgroup> | Twitter >> <http://twitter.com/#%21/SSBBARTGroup> | LinkedIn >> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog >> <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter <http://eepurl.com/O5DP> >> >> From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org] >> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2015 8:21 PM >> To: Jonathan Avila >> Cc: Sailesh Panchang; Wayne Dick; IG - WAI Interest Group List list >> Subject: Re: Poor contrast on focus indicator: SC 2.4.7 failure? >> >> Disabling CSS? >> >> First time I’ve heard of disabling CSS as a way to create a better focus >> indicator. The default indicator is usually almost invisible. I have >> only heard of using CSS to INCREASE the visibility of the focus cursor. >> Unfortunately it isn’t that easy to do unless people are more technically >> adept. >> >> What did you have in mind with disabling CSS for a more visible focus >> indicator? >> >> gregg >> >> ---------------------------------- >> Gregg Vanderheiden >> gregg@raisingthefloor.org <mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org> >> >> >> >> >> On May 24, 2015, at 6:09 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com >> <mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>> wrote: >> >> So I do not think disabling CSS to do away with poor contrast on the >> focus indicator will make it pass 2.4.7. >> >> I hope we don't go down the path of saying that disabling CSS can help you >> allow you to meet success criteria. While in theory this could work it >> relegates people with low vision to use an interface that is visually not >> equal to that presented to people without disabilities all in the name of >> not wanting to use sufficient contrast. >> >> Jonathan >> >> -- >> Jonathan Avila >> Chief Accessibility Officer >> SSB BART Group >> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com <mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> >> >> 703-637-8957 (o) >> Follow us: Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Blog | Newsletter >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sailesh Panchang [mailto:sailesh.panchang@deque.com >> <mailto:sailesh.panchang@deque.com>] >> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2015 7:49 AM >> To: Wayne Dick >> Cc: WAI Interest Group >> Subject: Poor contrast on focus indicator: SC 2.4.7 failure? >> >> Hello Wayne, >> SC 1.4.3 (AA) applies to text and images of text and not to the visual >> focus indicator for links / other UI controls. >> Yet, poor contrast of the visual focus indicator too may make the focus >> indicator not "visible" or clearly discernible and cause a failure of SC >> 2.4.7 in my opinion. >> Do you agree / perceive poor contrast of the focus indicator as an SC >> 2.4.7 failure? >> By the way, disabling CSS may make the focus indicator visible for reasons >> not impacted by poor contrast too, yet SC 2.4.7 is on the books at Level >> AA. >> So I do not think disabling CSS to do away with poor contrast on the >> focus indicator will make it pass 2.4.7. >> >> Thanks, >> Sailesh Panchang >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2015 13:44:10 UTC