W3C

Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
08 Apr 2015

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Regrets
john_foliot
Chair
Janina
Scribe
fesch

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 08 April 2015

<janina> agenda: this

preview agenda with items from two minutes

<scribe> scribenick: fesch

Contrast Followup (with GV) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Feb/0042.html

Previous Meeting Minutes https://www.w3.org/2015/04/01-pf-minutes.html

action-1610

<trackbot> action-1610 -- Janina Sajka to Skim css scroll snap points module level 1 to see if there are issues with content bigger than viewport http://www.w3.org/tr/css-snappoints-1/ -- due 2015-04-08 -- OPEN

<trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1610

<MichaelC> action-1610 due 1 week

<trackbot> Set action-1610 Skim css scroll snap points module level 1 to see if there are issues with content bigger than viewport http://www.w3.org/tr/css-snappoints-1/ due date to 2015-04-15.

Actions Review (Specs) http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/open

<MichaelC> The Permissions API

new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html#tr_LCWD

Previous Meeting Minutes https://www.w3.org/2015/04/01-pf-minutes.html

js: minutes from two weeks ago and last week approved

Community Groups http://www.w3.org/community/groups/

Contrast Followup (with GV) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Feb/0042.html

gv: recording secession

js: provides info for recording

jn: I can tell what my concerns are - when text appears in front of gradient or images or anything that is not a constant single color -
... what percent doesn't need to meet the color contrast ration (ie 4.5) - for example if a line goes across the image
... Cynthia's concern - the formula for calculating the contrast ratio from the source, not the rendering (for testing for compliance)

gv: if text is incidental in the image it is not a problem - that is exception
... if text is over an image - then there is a problem - we prepared this in cooperation with the Light house for the blind
... by the way, it is luminosity contrast ratio - not color contrast ratio. We need to get the word color out of the name - it is just "contrast ratio" not "color contrast ratio". Color contrast may be affected by color blindness.
... We use luminosity to account for, and provide contrast for, both low vision and color blindness
... the numbers came from and are based on luminosity contrast research
... a contrast of 3:1 is usually the mainstream recommended contrast for reading text, for really big text, the mainstream contrast recommendations are less
... For low vision and color blindness to have the equivalent of 3:1 for example - you need 5:1
... Regarding "size" of text - you have to make some assumptions - using a regular size screen, not mobile
... a 14 point font on a mobile screen will be tiny
... if the user has trouble seeing text, they have to share responsibility, that is, they need to adjust their choice of device to work for them
... someone with low vision will not be able to read small text on a small screen
... When we did the calculations for people with low vision - the numbers came in at 5:1 as the recommended value. We shifted to it 4.5:1 so you could have two sets of contrast (A can contrast with B which can contrast with C - with 5:1 that is not possible).
... with regard to text over background images - that is a problem. One solution is providing a glow around the letters. Without this, lines in the background that collide with the text could be bad since it may look like the lines are part of the text
... gradients - because it is 4.5:1 you can make that happen. A glow around letters can make them pop,
... anti aliasing should be reapplied as it gets larger so you shouldn't get large pixelation.

<jamesn> qi gradients

gv: when you have text in an image, it is incidental and not required
... basic issue - are we making so hard for the user to comprehend the letters
... Providing a glow around the letters can sharpen the contrast over any background,
... changing the formula won't help. When you provide patterns under letters where the letters touch the patterns, it does create issues

jn: asking whether you can do it, what about the one tiny corner that doesn't meet the criteria

gv: People can use judgement to where something is material or not.

jn: when you have customers that want to buy software, needs to meet the standard...
... some customers get excited if a few pixels don't meet the criteria
... need some way to tell customers, that it is OK

gv: got to be some rationality ...

jn: it can take a lot of time and effort to let folks know that you meet the spirit...
... not trival to get a UI change

gv: nothing you can do about this...
... part of my concern that someone, a purchasing agent or judge - not accept it, usually they go the other way
... already it talks about pixelation and antialiased edge of a character... so do it from the center
... won't expect any reasonable evaluator would reject something based on a random pixel

cs: one of the values of the ratio is it is algorithmic, calculable, so you can either meet the criteria or not

gv: when you do the algorithm, if you have an aliased character where does the value come from?

cs: when I do it I use the CSS (color) values

gv: you use the specified value, what about image backgrounds

cs: I tell developers to avoid image backgrounds

gv: or use glow to increase contrast

cs: our guidance is very clear, with a mathematical formula - very clear, a gradient is calculable, an alpha layer is calculable

gv: if you have a gradient, could do a reverse gradient on the text
... we look at words, not character at a time, - low vision users need to look at characters
... latest problem with alpha - will run into same issues -

cs: contrast - not pattern - layering of semi transparent things, hard to know what the color will come out..
... could update formula for transparency

gv: if the renderer can figure that out, you should be able to

fe: WCAG formula does not use alpha in contrast formula

cs: the formula in WCAG needs to be updated

<jamesn> (agrees with gv)

gv: it would be a mess to update the formula, no reason to fix the formula
... we don't specify how you get L1

cs: I see, but it looses the simplicity of using a formula

gv: changes not needed to fomula. Just look at how to lalculate L1 L2

js: not sure what are next steps are - expect to continue... will have more things to say

<jamesn> What I really need is a way to calculate an effective colour for a background image/gradient etc.

gv: closing comments - if talking about edge case and you try to accommodate it, then you will just create another edge cases, try lightening the image to make it more readable
... over a pattern, if you don't, add a little glow around letter, can make it easier to pass

cs: thanks for coming,

gv" would be happy to come again

fe: how you get L1 value - important to know where it came from - so may need to worry about composting for transparent colors from CSS

gv: also as soon as you do this, in 6 months someone may come up with something else

jn: yes, really looking for help from background - if from an image I can do sampling -- what I want help on is how to get sampling to get a pass

gv: every environment may do things differently

cs: I want to be able to tell designers - use these colors - these pass, and do this determinsitically

gv: contrast rules do not apply to text in charts or diagrams

<jamesn> http://jdevadf.oracle.com/adf-richclient-demo/faces/components/thematicMap.jspx;jsessionid=DVeaAJbTu17imG2de_-7An1jJ3LRoXi3r5XcqFeWM1mwKzm2NsBA!1452442027 for example

gv: labels in charts and maps do need contrast

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/04/27 15:03:39 $