- From: SALES, TERRY LYNN <TERRYLYNN.SALES@cbp.dhs.gov>
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:54:12 +0000
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I have the luxury of working with development teams while they are still in development. So I make them fix it before it gets to formal testing. :-) Terry Lynn (TL) Sales DHS Trusted Tester, CMII, PMP DHS/CBP/OIT/CSPD 571-468-5271 Desk 703-945-2777 B’Berry -----Original Message----- From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 10:26 AM To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: Color contrast question - button background On 18/04/2018 14:42, SALES, TERRY LYNN wrote: > The letter of the standard is for text, however, I apply it to > anything that has meaning and would cause an issue if not recognizable > by a user. Icons used as links, buttons like your example, etc. If > the user would miss a function or action available to others by not > being able to distinguish an item’s presence, I make them fix the contrast. However, note that when taking this interpretation, you're going beyond what the normative requirement of WCAG 2.0 is - so your results (in the case of a formal audit report against WCAG 2.0) won't be correct. As others have noted, WCAG 2.1 will plug this gap, but when auditing against WCAG 2.0, you can't mark anything other than contrast issues of text vs background as a fail. P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2018 14:55:07 UTC