Re: 2.4.7 Focus Visible

I believe the EU and USA both link WCAG AA criteria to legal disability
equalities laws, Adam.

Obviously "most" of the world has no equalities laws because most of the
world by population size have very little in the way of jurisdiction -
meaning a fair an imparial judiciary.


On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 12:27 AM Adam Cooper <cooperad@bigpond.com> wrote:

> It’s worth noting that there is no such connection between WCAG and any
> state or federal legislation in Australia so “most jurisdictions “may be
> stating what is the case in the U.S.  and perhaps the EU only …
>
>
>
> *From:* Michael Livesey <mike.j.livesey@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 12, 2023 6:52 AM
> *To:* Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
> *Cc:* Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: 2.4.7 Focus Visible
>
>
>
> The difference between A and AA has a legal difference in that AA is the
> legal minimum as set out by equalities legislation in most jurisdictions
> for most public sector (charity, educational, government) sites.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 9:28 PM Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>
> I don’t really want to get involved in this back and forth, but am
> pointing out that the A/AA distinction is for all intents and purposes
> meaningless.  This is because all standards drawing on WCAG seem to include
> both A and AA (with a couple cherry picking exclusions for a couple of
> thorny specific SCs).
>
>
>
> You’ll hear some conceptual arguments that failing an A is worse than a
> AA, but I’ve never seen evidence of that enter into procurement decisions.
>
>
>
> We had moved Focus Visible from AA to A in the first drafts of 2.2 to make
> space for a new Focus Appearance at AA, but when that hit the shoals during
> testing and went to AAA, the WG pushed Focus Visible back to AA again,
> because we didn’t have a new AA and whether it was A or AA was deemed
> immaterial by many (so why force checkers to have to move it?).
>
>
>
> I concur with Juliette’s last sentiment that this discussion has probably
> run its course. WG members can look at the arguments in the thread to
> inform their votes on changes to the Understanding document.
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> *From: *Michael Livesey <mike.j.livesey@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 1:00 PM
> *To: *Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> *Cc: *w3c-wai-ig@w3.org <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] Re: 2.4.7 Focus Visible
>
> Just a additional correction to your post so that other readers are not
> mislead >> WCAG sets a baseline lowest limit of what sites must do in order
> to comply. WCAG 2. 4. 7 is AA rated. It is not the baseline lowest limit at
> all. It is a
>
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
>
> *This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender *
>
> You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
>
>   *  Report Suspicious  *
> <https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/PjiDSg!12-vrJEwpjW0FW67lIkq4SZfFDuvzROyOjxfYJVRh-K16PDJu_8Pz_AiKAs8ogkdB3OSEOCXcal0sHsby9EAjSpFcNZwhk3c8hmhGNGb9IGUFniWPNkOwumKTYA6MDQ$>  ‌
>
>
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
>
> Just a additional correction to your post so that other readers are not
> mislead
>
> >> WCAG sets a baseline lowest limit of what sites must do in order to
> comply.
>
>
>
> WCAG 2.4.7 is AA rated. It is not the baseline lowest limit at all. It is
> a mid-level target, AA is regarded as a prestigious level. I wouldn't have
> an issue if keyboard only focus was rated "A" and there was an additional
> criteria at AA and AAA that required more extensive compliance. But we are
> talking about obliterating focus-visible and still maintaining AA
> accreditation here.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux
> https://mastodon.social/@patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>