E-mail List Archives

Re: Colour contrast standard

for

From: tedd
Date: Oct 23, 2007 7:10AM


At 2:35 PM +0100 10/22/07, Alastair Campbell wrote:
>On 10/16/07, Mike Osborne - AccEase < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>> Are these numbers arbitrary or is one right and the other wrong? Is 500 too
>> much or is 400 inadequate?
>
>I seriously doubt there is a real answer to that, for most people the
>HP one is fine, but I'm sure there are some who benefit from very high
>contrast.
>
>It is a sliding scale, and you could argue that those with a need for
>extreme contrast should have tools (e.g. user style sheets / Opera /
>system tools) that provide that regardless of what the site does.
>
>If you look at the colour range allowed by the W3C one, it doesn't
>give you a whole lot of flexibility in the design, although I'm not
>sure how the WCAG 2 algorithm varies from version 1? I'm under the
>impression it's not directly comparable, although I'll check with a
>colleague who put together some tools based on it.
>
>Kind regards,
>
>-Alastair

Excuse me for injecting my two cents, but how does contrast standards
work with the different states of links? If you study the problem,
you'll see that there's not enough range to provide sufficient
contrast between different states of links using 500 or even 400.

If there is, please tell me the combination.

Cheers,

tedd

--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com