Re: 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) - Sufficient Technique for UI Controls

Thanks for the feedback on this. Given the responses and some brief
discussion on last week's WCAG Working Group call, I would like to hear if
there are any objections to adding the following as an Advisory Technique
to 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum):
 Making user interface controls that meet the contrast provisions for
 text
Regards,
Marc Johlic
Accessibility Consultant
Human Ability & Accessibility Center, IBM Research
 
 ( (T/L) 391-5905 | External For self-help visit us at the IBM Human 
 813-356-3081 Ability & Accessibility Center 
 * johlic@us.ibm.com Follow us on ibm.com/able | Facebook | 
 Twitter 
 
From:	Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
To:	Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>
Cc:	w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org, Marc
 Johlic/Tampa/IBM@IBMUS
Date:	03/28/2011 05:58 PM
Subject:	Re: 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) - Sufficient Technique for UI
 Controls
Sent by:	w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
On Mar 25, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Sailesh Panchang wrote:
 ark,
 However, we still run into problems with developers on their
 active UI >components because they are quick to point out that
 the techniques state >"text or images of text". Therefore their
 UI controls (or icons) are exempt >from 1.4.3 because they do
 not have any text associated with them.
 Well in reality these active UI elements fail SC 1.1.1 . They are
 non text elements that have no text equivalents. How is a non-visual
 user supposed to understand what they are? So the UI elements need
 to comply with SC 1.1.1 first, then evaluated for SC 1.4.3 (contrast)
 and SC 2.4.7 (visual focus indicator).
 No problem with WCAG 2 there.
 But I do not understand why "inactive controls that are not visible
 to anyone" figure in the text of SC 1.4.3 under exceptions. If it is
 not visible then how does contrast matter?
 My contention is that SC 1.4.3 and SC 2.4.7 should be elevated to
 Level A status. I see quite a few transgressions of these SC. There
 are no readily available and workable fixes via features of the
 browser / assistive technology for these two SC. In fact some users
 who do not use AT may encounter these issues. The fixes have to be
 done by Web content developers. I'll be happy to learn if this is
 incorrect.
 Sailesh Panchang
 Director, Accessibility Services
 www.deque.com
 Tel 571-449-3576
Hi Sailesh
Some quick notes that may help with this.
RE: 1.4.3 and "inactive controls that are not visible to anyone
There is no exception for "inactive controls that are not visible to
anyone". I think you are reading the provision wrong.
 Incidental: Text or images of text that are part of an inactive user
 interface component, that are pure decoration, that are not visible
 to anyone, or that are part of a picture that contains significant
 other visual content, have no contrast requirement.
should be read as
 Incidental: Text or images of text
- that are part of an inactive user interface component,
- that are pure decoration,
- that are not visible to anyone, or
- that are part of a picture that contains significant other visual
content,
 have no contrast requirement.
The "not visible to anyone" is there because sometimes people will put
white text on white background to add text that is visible to screen
readers users only. or for other reasons. This simply says that contrast
rules do not apply to that text.
RE: Elevating SC
- that is not possible anymore. The WCAG 2.0 has been released and cannot
be changed.
RE work arounds
--- The text is programmatically determinable so it can be rendered in high
contrast if needed using a plug in or special AT.