WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Color of link text

for

From: Srinivasu Chakravarthula
Date: Jul 7, 2016 1:55AM

I think it's still relevant on touch devices too. Imagine user with low
vision / cognitive who may use screen reader for reading purpose but have
habit of looking at screen.

Thanks,
Srinivasu

Regards,

Srinivasu Chakravarthula - Twitter: http://twitter.com/CSrinivasu/
Website: http://www.srinivasu.org | http://serveominclusion.com

Let's create an inclusive web!

Lead Accessibility Consultant, Informatica
Hon. Joint Secretary, The National Association for the Blind, Karnataka
Branch

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Joseph Sherman < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> Given that focus and hover do not really exist on mobile, and mobile
> devices are ubiquitous, should the 3:1 contrast plus focus/hover indication
> remain a conforming technique?
>
> If not, then to use links without underline wouldn't you need to find
> three colors (background, text, links) with 4.5:1 contrast from the other
> two? Do such colors exist?
>
> Joseph
>
> On Jun 27, 2016 9:17 PM, Jonathan Avila < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
> > My question is whether the focus outline itself counts as an additional
> differentiation, when the link receives focus, if it has the 3:1 contrast
> between the link and surrounding text. It seems to technically satisfy
> 1.4.1, but I don't think it should.
>
> Joseph, I often wondered the same thing. F73 does not include test steps
> saying to focus the links which G183 does and thus currently with F73 a
> link that just uses color (hue) would fail F73. F73 also does not relate
> to contrast -- but only focuses on Hue -- so links and text that are
> differentiated with contrast/lightness could pass F73. This is definitely
> an area that could use some clarification.
>
> F73: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20130905/F73
>
> In the check for G183 it doesn't seem to say that an outline is not
> sufficient -- it just says some other visual enhancement but doesn't
> specify if that enhancement must be on the link text itself or can surround
> the link text. If you consider image links -- they have similar challenges
> with the user not knowing they are clickable.
>
> G183 https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20130905/G183.html
>
> Jonathan
>
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
> 703.637.8957 (Office)
>
> Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | Linkedin | Blog
> Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars!
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> Behalf Of Joseph Sherman
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 4:31 PM
> To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Color of link text
>
> I think there is a confusion. No one is proposing to use the focus outline
> on non-focused links.
>
>
>
> In the WCAG specs for 1.4.1, it says you should have a non-color visual
> clue like underline. However, you do not NEED a non-color clue for your
> links if: you have a least 3:1 contrast between the link text and
> surrounding text, AND an additional differentiation (e.g., it becomes
> underlined) is provided when the link is hovered over or receives focus.
>
>
>
> My question is whether the focus outline itself counts as an additional
> differentiation, when the link receives focus, if it has the 3:1 contrast
> between the link and surrounding text. It seems to technically satisfy
> 1.4.1, but I don't think it should.
>
>
>
>
>
> Joseph
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> Behalf Of Snahendu Bhattacharya
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 3:48 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Color of link text
>
>
>
> Hi Joseph!
>
>
>
> I think there is a gap between these two guideline.
>
>
>
> By providing additional non color visual clue (1.4.1), you are ensuring
> your links are clearly and readily identifiable, for the people with or
> without color vision, immaterial to the fact whether user has focused on
> the link or not.
>
>
>
> Second part is about visible focus (outline/caret line) for the keyboard
> user (2.4.7), when user uses screen focus to understand their current
> focused location in the screen, they should be able to do it.
>
>
>
> Now if you make the 'caret line/outline' as default
> identifier/differentiator for your link, that would create confusion for
> the user who is trying to tab through the page and can't identify any
> considerable amount of visual change for the links when the links receives
> focus, as because the caret line/outline is already present.
>
>
>
> Preferably the underline (or any other non color differentiator) should be
> present by default and then on focus to the link, should make a significant
> change to the focusable element to make the user understand about their
> current keyboard focus position. Either by removing the underline or adding
> a outline/caret line (to be consistent).
>
> On Jun 27, 2016 3:15 PM, "Joseph Sherman" < <EMAIL REMOVED> <mailto:
> <EMAIL REMOVED> >> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In 1.4.1, assuming you cannot get folks to underline their links- if
>
> > you have a 3:1 link and text contrast, does the default focus outline
>
> > count as "additional differentiation" on focus?
>
> >
>
> > "Color alone is not used to distinguish links<
>
> > http://webaim.org/techniques/hypertext/>; from surrounding text unless
>
> > the luminance contrast between the link and the surrounding text is at
>
> > least
>
> > 3:1 and an additional differentiation (e.g., it becomes underlined) is
>
> > provided when the link is hovered over or receives focus."
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Joseph
>
> >
>
> > >
> > >
> > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>
> > > > <EMAIL REMOVED> <mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>
> >
>
> >
> > at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>
> > <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> > > at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > > > > > > >