[Irl-dean] Color contrast and WCAG 2.2 priority?

[Gez Lemon]

Hi Mark,

> On 17 Jan 2007, at 14:54, Gez Lemon wrote:
> > For plain text in an image, a user can access the text alternate.
>
> Well yes they _can_ but how? Some methods are:
>
> 1. Use a screen reader, which will speak it to you.
> 2. Use a browser that displays alt attributes on mouseover.
> 3. Look in the page source code.
> 4. Use some other tool that can interrogate a web page to extract alt
> attributes.

Other methods include user-defined style sheets, user-defined scripts
(including Greasemonkey type scripts), or disabling images completely.
None of these are ideal, and neither have I suggested that they are
equivalents.

> It seems to me that, for someone who just has a slight colour or
> brightness deficiency, it is unreasonable to expect them to resort to
> any of these methods. Of course, others will disagree.

This list has a bit of a habit of attributing statements to people
that are out of context. I'm not the person that suggested this was an
equivalent in the first place. In fact, I'm the only person that that
suggested there might be other reasons as to why colour contrast in
images should be considered important in WCAG 1.0. If you disagree
with Barry's assertions, it would be more appropriate to take it up
with him than me. I most definitely do not advocate that people don't
need to worry about colour contrast, regardless of the medium, and I
think I've done more than most to try and improve accessibility in
this particular area.

Gez

-- 
_____________________________
Supplement your vitamins
http://juicystudio.com