Re: { contrast } on focus

Hurrah!! On the pull request. Thanks for the joy!

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020, 11:14 AM Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 12/11/2020 16:08, caroline wrote:
> > Thanks so much (and apologies for the delayed response). I wonder if
> > that detail would be worth adding to the wcag as gmail is not the only
> > place I've seen this.
>
> I suspect the main reason for many sites having low contrast is simply
> that they ignore WCAG. Don't think it's due to a misunderstanding of
> what "inactive user interface components" are...
>
> > There are times where terms/meaning differ between design and
> > development. There was a thought that perhaps someone is translating a
> > tab in the navigation to be disabled until a user tabs to it. Whatever
> > the reason I feel a distinction for link states may be needed. It could
> > just be me though.
>
> There's a pull request (for WCAG 2.2) to add a definition of "inactive"
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1154 which should help in cases like
> this to clarify what is meant. Hoping it will get merged soon (and
> ideally, I'd love to have that glossary definition backported into WCAG
> 2.1 and 2.0 ...)
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>