E-mail List Archives

Re: Disabled Controls and WCAG Contrast

for

From: Donald Evans
Date: Nov 21, 2011 9:51AM


So there seems to be a bit of a disconnect. SC 1.4.3 clearly
indicates "* *Text or images of text that are part of an inactive user
interface component<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html#user-interface-componentdef>;"
are exempt from color contrast rules.

Yet, this control conveys the information that it is disabled. So we use
ARIA to indicate that; we create tab stops, etc. But how is this
information conveyed to the low vision magnifier user who can not discern
the difference in contrast?



On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Paul Adam < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> I recommend using readonly=readonly instead of disabled=disabled because
> screen readers will skip right over a disabled form field when tabbing
> through. I've seen times where they were obviously using the disabled field
> to indicate information visually to users but wanted to prevent the user
> from editing that information. By using readonly you can do the same thing,
> prevent editing, but keep the field in the TAB order.
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Lucy Greco < <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >wrote:
>
> > If the link is disabled how does the screen reader know that. Have you
> > coded it in a way ware the screen reader does not speak it if not you
> need
> > to somehow let everyone know it is disabled. Forget the standers and
> think
> > about usability first. If I hit this with my screen reader I would try
> and
> > activate it innless you use some method to let me know otherwise.
> >
> > Lucy Greco
> > Assistive Technology Specialist
> > Disabled Student's Program UC Berkeley
> > (510) 643-7591
> > http://attlc.berkeley.edu
> > http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto:
> > <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Donald Evans
> > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 8:26 AM
> > To: WebAIM Discussion List
> > Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Disabled Controls and WCAG Contrast
> >
> > I did see that, but the grayed out content does indicate disabled to the
> > sighted user. So wasn't sure it was decoration?
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > No - see 1.4.3:
> > >
> > > " Incidental: Text or images of text that are part of an inactive user
> > > interface component, that are pure decoration, that are not visible to
> > > anyone, or that are part of a picture that contains significant other
> > > visual content, have no contrast requirement."
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > AWK
> > >
> > > Andrew Kirkpatrick
> > > Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> > > Adobe Systems
> > >
> > > <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > http://twitter.com/awkawk
> > > http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto:
> > > <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Donald Evans
> > > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 11:22 AM
> > > To: WebAIM Discussion List
> > > Subject: [WebAIM] Disabled Controls and WCAG Contrast
> > >
> > > Do disabled controls (grayed out to indicate disabled) have to meet
> > > WCAG SC 1.4.3?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Donald F. Evans,
> > > Making Websites Accessible
> > > Senior Accessibility Architect
> > > Deque Systems
> > > Email: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > Download FireEyes Free:
> > > http://www.deque.com/products/worldspace-fireeyes
> > >
> > > <http://www.deque.com>;
> > >