Re: is any WCAG criteria to account both default and Dark mode for content

On 11/02/2023 23:33, Adam Cooper wrote:
> Ironic, really, that a client may be paying dearly and in good faith for 
> something that doesn’t make their websites accessible for all users and 
> for which there is likely a simple solution.

I strongly resent the implication here (and in Guy's points) that we as 
auditors hired explicitly to do a strict WCAG compliance assessment 
(often with the explicit end goal from the client to get an ACR) are 
somehow shortchanging and defrauding our clients...

If *you* want to go above and beyond what you're being hired by your 
client to you ... you do you, boo. Implying that this is what we all 
*should* do and that those that don't are just not showing enough 
commitment to Sparkle Motion is...well, it's an opinion, for sure.

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

Received on Saturday, 11 February 2023 23:46:21 UTC