WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Minimal style needed to make links accessible?

for

From: Eyal Sela (
Date: Aug 23, 2010 4:24PM

according to "F73: Failure of Success Criterion 1.4.1 due to creating links
that are not visually evident without color
vision<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/complete.html#F73>;",
they could be (for example) bolded or italicized insted of underlined.

--
Eyal Sela
productivewise.com
twitter.com/Eyalsela
linkedin.com/in/selaeyal
Cell:+972-54-445-8271



On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 21:25, Jared Smith < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:06 PM, E.J. Zufelt wrote:
>
> > So, in short, when a link does not use the standard underline, what is
> the minimal stylistic difference it must have from the non-link text on the
> page to maintain perceivability?
>
> This WebAIM blog entry presents the WCAG 2.0 requirements -
> http://webaim.org/blog/wcag-2-0-and-link-colors/
>
> In short, WCAG 2.0 requires a contrast ratio of of 3:1 between
> non-underlined links and surrounding text. As the article points out,
> when you combine this requirement with the foreground/background
> contrast requirements, the possible color combinations for the page
> become fairly limited.
>
> Also of note is that non-color designators (typically the introduction
> of the underline) are required when the link is hovered with the mouse
> or receives keyboard focus (a:focus, a:hover in CSS). This is a Level
> A requirement.
>
> Jared Smith
> WebAIM.org
>