search

w3c / wcag

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/
Other
1.09k stars 246 forks source link

Logo still excepted 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast when colors are not the original brand colors? #1742

Open jake-abma opened 3 years ago

jake-abma commented 3 years ago

When logo's are used as a way to communicate they are the brands present / available for the product of the page, and needed to understand what choices you have.

but...

The Graphical Objects used to provide this information happen to be logo's BUT the color is changed, to have a visual match for all logo's (basically make the intent of the except non applicable...).

May we FAIL this? (I think we should)

And going into this direction, does the except for logo's only apply if the reason for the except also apply (the 'essential'?

Example is at a Deque demo page, where the logo's in the middle of the page are intentionally made light grey, basically taking away the 'essential' part

https://dequeuniversity.com/demo/dream#

jake-abma commented 3 years ago
Screen Shot 2021-04-15 at 11 52 15 AM
JAWS-test commented 3 years ago

Related: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/1739

bruce-usab commented 3 years ago

Hmm, I just now am picking up on that particular presentation of logos being exempted by 1.4.11 is only implicit, whereas that is explicit with 1.4.3, 1.4.5, 1.4.6, and 1.4.9. Should 1.4.11 have the same note as 1.4.5 and 1.4.9? Maybe not! And just for the kind of example @jake-abma cites here!

Is it really reasonable to expect an auditor to know the original colors of a logo, and that there is a change? I don't think so, and if a company/organization has a logo with lousy contrast, why shouldn't an a11y audit call that out?

I would fail the logo string example in this Deque University page against against 1.4.11. It's a good example, as designed, of what not to do.