- From: Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>
- Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 15:58:45 -0400
- To: Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>, "w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <23C05F2A-9DFC-4E22-AAF1-EACB5BAB0DE8@umd.edu>
Just FYI Technically — we don’t have any such things as "formal tests" except for TECHNIQUES. This can’t be a formal test unless the SC says that you must do exactly this - or rather the SC must say " Content passes the following test" you put it forward as an informal test — but the SC is the only criterion for passing the SC. (that is what its name means— success criterion. The WG COULD propose the test as a ‘sufficient’ test of the SC. That is — if you pass, you pass. But you cannot say that if you fail you fail unless the SC says this specifically. Gregg Gregg C Vanderheiden greggvan@umd.edu > On Apr 1, 2017, at 2:49 PM, Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com> wrote: > > I proposed this color test. > It should work. > The colors are selected randomly so that they support a 4.5:1 ratio. > This test should be sufficient. > It tests two random color choices (one dark one light). > The combination is most likely a mud color (light or dark). > The test looks at dark on light and light on dark. > It is significant that !important is left off the first test. > It should be run twice, without and with !important. > The non-important will flush out element level style. > The important will flush real erroneous cases. > > Look for colors that do not change. > Loss of functionality, images disappear, icons dispensary > > If colors do not change add-in background-image: none. > > Pay attention to borders and padding. These may also need to be specified. > > I would like to put this forward as a formal test. > > Wayne > >
Received on Saturday, 1 April 2017 19:59:20 UTC