WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Removing CSS Background image for legibility an Accessibility requirement?

for

From: Swift, Daniel P.
Date: Mar 15, 2022 11:35AM

It should just work if you set the background color first and then background image/size afterwards. Something like this:

#container {
color: #FFF;
background-color: #000;
background: url(image.jpg);
background-size: cover;
}

Daniel Swift, MBA
Senior Web Specialist
University Communications and Marketing
West Chester University
610.738.0589

From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Tom Livingston
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 1:29 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Removing CSS Background image for legibility an Accessibility requirement?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 9:39 AM Patrick H. Lauke < <EMAIL REMOVED> <mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> >> wrote:
>
> On 15/03/2022 13:07, JP Jamous wrote:
>
> > Is it a WCAG failure?
> > Of course, because white on white provide no visible content. That fails color contrast big time.
>
> However, you're not testing the site as sent by the author - a site that
> was using CSS and images as its accessibility-supported baseline
> technology. This is essentially testing that once a user has customised
> their experience, things still work, which is outside of WCAG. So I'd
> disagree here, it's not a WCAG failure (though there is a failure
> technique - non-normative, of course -
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Techniques/general/G148<https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Techniques/general/G148> that seems to
> suggest that not setting a fallback colour in addition to an image
> background is a failure ... but I'm not sold on this being a hard
> failure, again because it relates to the user having modified how the
> author-provided content is displayed. I'd say it's more best practice...
>
> Long story short, from my point of view: no, you don't really test sites
> these days with CSS or images or JavaScript disabled. That's some
> hang-up from old WCAG 1.0 / original Section 508 (before it was 508
> Refresh, incorporating WCAG 2.0 by reference). So the scenario of "with
> the background image off, you can't see the white on white text" is, to
> me, a best practice case rather than an outright failure of WCAG. But
> opinions may be split here...
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>


What is the best way to plan a fallback for when a bg image doesn't
load when using white type over a background image? A dark background
color also specified? This seems like it would have some issues, like
scaling text causing the BG color to be visible.


--

Tom Livingston | Senior Front End Developer | Media Logic |
ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | medialogic.com


#663399