<JimA> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-tf/2019Aug/0015.html

<JimA> dotted vs solid, thickness, space between outline and object, etc. any research on any of the aspect.

<JimA> any thoughts review it all, more examples, better examples.

<scribe> scribe: Laura

Typeface

jim: BBC did some work on fonts and did a document proposing an SC.

shawn: on her todo list. BBC has a doc and some questions.
... They have their own font. But they haven’t looked at others.

jim: may be a silver thing.

shawn: some things with fonts are clear cut but other than that it is individual preference.

focus visible - review on 2.2

<JimA> https://alastairc.uk/tests/wcag21-examples/ntc-focus-styles.html

jim: Alastair is working on SC and examples.
... jon and jim thought separation works well.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g9_WBgfhViWAaRFIWWt10CP5rBsEVIWm3vT1vWqrHvI/edit#heading=h.s1rdduthbnva

<jon_avila> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g9_WBgfhViWAaRFIWWt10CP5rBsEVIWm3vT1vWqrHvI/edit#heading=h.s1rdduthbnva

jim: propose separation inside or outside for SC Text.

jon: 3 options - Inside, Space, or Thick enough

jim: if no spacing then 2 pixels. I is just too small.

Wayne: cant see it on Example 5.

jim: 5 is really subtle.

jon: you have to take into account other things. whiteness overpowers.
... seems like contrast should be enough for example 5 but it is not.

wayne: spacing makes it jump out

jim: 7 is ok

jon: 8 appears thicker.

wayne: put in understanding that some people will only see one buttion at a time

Jim: wonder if ex 9 would pass at all?

jon: AG decided only need text to contrast not background.

<JimA> problem of research. when you have competing results.

jon: having it inside a little bit helps.

<JimA> possible silver SC - browser allows choice of focus outline for all web pages

Jon: thing 3rd bullet in SC covers part of my concerns.
... proposal is good progress. Is there any more we can get into it that is testable and people would accept?
... need to protect language so that it isn’t diluted by AG.

Jim: what about adding a 4th bullet for spacing?
... that there is a separation. 1 px sseparation between boundary.

jon: don’t think that would work.
... see it more as a technique.
... if we require separation it probably wouldn’t be adopted.
... right now SC has 3 bullets:

1. Minimum area: The focus indication area is greater or equal to the longest side of the focused control times 1 CSS pixel.

<JimA> 2.4.11 Minimum area: The focus indication area is greater or equal to the longest side of the focused control times 1 CSS pixel.

<JimA> Minimum focus thickness: If the focus indication area is adjacent to a color with which it does not have a 3:1 contrast ratio difference, the thickness of the focus indicator is at least 2 CSS pixel.

2. Minimum focus thickness: If the focus indication area is adjacent to a color with which it does not have a 3:1 contrast ratio difference, the thickness of the focus indicator is at least 2 CSS pixel.

Focus contrast: Color changes used to indicate focus have at least a 3:1 contrast ratio with the colors changed from the unfocused control.

wayne: could make it an if/then condition for a fourth bullet.

<JimA> make a conditional - if there is separation of more than 1 pixel (inside or outside the control) then can have 1 pixel outline

jon: would allow horizontal line at one edge.
... Minimum area seem to be the weakest bullet.

Wayne: should advise in understanding doc test at different magnifications.

jon: should be more than 2px if only on 1 edge?
... could be useful to mock up some examples. 3 combinations.

Alll would be pass examples so we can test them.

<JimA> button with bottom border, 3:1 above and below the focus, only 3:1 either above or below the line, and 2 pixel with neither 3:1

<JimA> concerned with less than 3:1 for any outline at any size.

jon: most worried about 2 pixel with neither 3:1
... does that fall into 1.4.11?
... reads that 1.4.11 only requires one side has contrast. But would want to confirm with AC.

<JimA> 1.4.11 and 2.4.11 are closely related. they should cross reference each other.

jon: will send AC a note.

Jim: I will make a mockup of the 3 conditions.

<JimA> Jim will mockup of the 3 borders on buttons from jon above.

s/languge/language/

trackbot, end meeting

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/ bu AG/ by AG/
Succeeded: s/sen AC/send AC/
Succeeded: s/horizonal/horizontal/
Succeeded: s/languge/language/
Succeeded: s/thart is teastable /that is testable /
Succeeded: s/ sepatation. 1 px sepatation beween/ separation. 1 px sseparation between/
Succeeded: s/acount/account/
Succeeded: s/thier/their/
FAILED: s/languge/language/
Default Present: Jim, Jon, Laura, Wayne, Shawn, jon_avila
Present: Jim Jon Laura Wayne Shawn jon_avila
Regrets: jason
Found Scribe: Laura
Inferring ScribeNick: laura

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 29 Aug 2019
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)