E-mail List Archives
Re: Star ratings
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Oct 26, 2021 12:56PM
- Next message: glen walker: "Re: Star ratings"
- Previous message: glen walker: "Re: Star ratings"
- Next message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: Star ratings"
- Previous message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: Star ratings"
- View all messages in this Thread
whether the selected/filled in stars contrast enough with the non-selected/empty ones is more a 1.4.1 Use of Color issue (see latest update coming in the understanding doc for WCAG 2.2 which bubbles up the "if it's below a 3:1 difference, it counts as color alone)
> On 26 Oct 2021, at 19:53, glen walker < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>> But since the star colour is used to indicate state (checked or not
>> checked), then a star also has to contrast against stars in the other
>> state, so either the star colour should contrast or the outline should
>> contrast (different thicknesses for example).
> I don't think WCAG 1.4.11 says this. I think it's a great practice to have
> different states contrast with each other but WCAG doesn't require it.
> 1.4.11 starts off by saying "adjacent colors" before it qualifies whether
> it's a "User Interface Components" or "Graphical Objects". The key is that
> 1.4.11 is talking about colors that are literally touching each other.
> With states, you typically don't see them at the same time, or in the star
> rating example where you *can* see them at the same time, they're not
> touching each other so technically they're not "adjacent" and 1.4.11
> doesn't apply.
> If you take the state by itself and not compared to other states, then any
> particular state must have sufficient contrast with its adjacent colors in
> order to "identify" (WCAG wording) the state.
> That might be a nit pick and perhaps it's just my interpretation, but the
> different star states do not have to contrast with each other.
> > > >