W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2015

RE: Poor contrast on focus indicator: SC 2.4.7 failure?

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 14:11:46 +0000
To: "jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com" <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, "Sailesh Panchang" <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>, Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
CC: Wayne Dick <waynedick@knowbility.org>, IG - WAI Interest Group List list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BY1PR02MB1115BC47FAD9215F3E8823F9C7CC0@BY1PR02MB1115.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
If the author provided a link to an alternative view of the content that addressed conformance issues (G136: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G136.html) then an author might be able to claim conformance.  In fact, the author might just revert back to the browser default focus indication as part of how they address conformance (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G165.html).  I am of course not suggesting that this is what authors _should_ do, just that they could.
AWK

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Avila [mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 9:47 AM
To: Sailesh Panchang; Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: Wayne Dick; IG - WAI Interest Group List list
Subject: RE: Poor contrast on focus indicator: SC 2.4.7 failure?

> 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?

Yes definitely in my opinion.

Jonathan

-- 
Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group 
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] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 9:44 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: Jonathan Avila; Wayne Dick; IG - WAI Interest Group List list
Subject: Re: Poor contrast on focus indicator: SC 2.4.7 failure?

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 14:12:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 25 May 2017 01:54:15 UTC