Update contrast-minimum.html #3240
Conversation
|
This PR is responsive to comments on Question 6 in AGWG survey for call on 6/13/2023. Closes #2033 |
bruce-usab
requested review from
gundulaniemann,
detlevhfischer and
patrickhlauke
|
@detlevhfischer -- I cannot now find your comments in PR #2037 |
| @@ -13,15 +13,14 @@ <h1>Understanding Contrast (Minimum)</h1> | |||
| <h2>Intent of Contrast (Minimum)</h2> | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| <p>The intent of this Success Criterion is to provide enough contrast between text and its background so that it can be read by people with moderately low vision. | |||
| <p>The intent of this Success Criterion is to provide enough contrast between text and its background so that it can be read by people with limited vision, including color vision deficiencies. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change does make it less clear that the minimum contrast target is understood by the working group as not solving readability for all. Was this change intended to remove the phrase "low vision" or due to concern with the word moderately? If the former, how about "... with moderately limited vision,..."?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
my motivation was to point to color vision deficiencies as being particularly addressed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My concern is that that describes a condition, but we're actually talking about people. And there was a prior inference in the language that the WG understood this didn't solve things for everyone.
We can solve by the addition of "more" and a couple of other words
| <p>The intent of this Success Criterion is to provide enough contrast between text and its background so that it can be read by people with limited vision, including color vision deficiencies. | |
| <p>The intent of this Success Criterion is to provide enough contrast between text and its background so that it can be read by more people with limited vision, including those with color vision deficiencies. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Of the two above, I prefer the original, since this about intent. But I agree that we should not overstate the efficacy of the SC. How about:
The intent of this Success Criterion is to provide enough contrast between text and its background so that reading is easier for some people with limited vision, including some people with color vision deficiencies.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like both new suggestions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest:
The intent of this Success Criterion is to provide enough contrast between text and its background so that reading is easier for some people with limited vision, including people with color vision deficiencies.
Co-authored-by: Mike Gower <[email protected]>
|
Apologies, my novel PR to PR caused much confusion. I am taking a fresh stab at this, with a third PR. |
|
Clarified with Bruce, this is superseded by #3284 |
This PR incorporates feedback from survey:
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag2x-backlog1/results#xq29
Note that this PR is changes to PR mentioned in survey.
I cannot figure out why diff on line 23 looks like the paragraph was replaced. Change is only in last sentence, and all I did is (1) remove parenthesis, and (2) add the word "headings" after "white".