Blog » Archive by category 'News'
In the final release of WCAG 2, the acceptable minimum color contrast ratio was changed from 5:1 to 4.5:1. I’ve updated both my color contrast tests — Color Contrast Comparison Tool and the Color Contrast Spectrum Tool to reflect the change in contrast ratio.
What does this change mean?
Essentially, this means that the working group decided that color combinations with lower contrast (more similar colors) were acceptable for general use on the web. This is certainly good news for designers, since it will provide for a greater variety design voices than previously.
The contrast ratio of 4.5:1 was chosen for level AA because it compensated for the loss in contrast sensitivity usually experienced by users with vision loss equivalent to approximately 20/40 vision. (20/40 calculates to approximately 4.5:1.) 20/40 is commonly reported as typical visual acuity of elders at roughly age 80.
Understanding WCAG 2.0; Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.3
While the previous higher ratio requirement may have accommodated for an even larger audience, the decision of the committee appears to have been that it had crossed a line of diminishing returns, and that the lower requirement is sufficient for most common use.
This effects the minimum ratio to accommodate at Level AA, and the minimum ratio to accommodate at Level AAA for large print.
Still — don’t get carried away!
It’s been a long time coming, but as of today the standards of accessibility expressed in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines are officially updated.
A W3C recommendation is the most final state a document can reach in the W3C standards system, and should now be considered the standard document for accessibility, superceding WCAG 1.
A W3C Recommendation is a specification or set of guidelines that, after extensive consensus-building, has received the endorsement of W3C Members and the Director. W3C recommends the wide deployment of its Recommendations. Note: W3C Recommendations are similar to the standards published by other organizations.
Although there has been a great deal of controversy over the past few years concerning the validity of the WCAG 2 revision, the final document has managed to deal with the greater proportion of problems. Not everything, certainly — but expecting perfection in such a vast area of concern is, frankly, an unrealistic concern.
Jared Smith recommends reviewing the original draft from January 2001 to make comparison — could be entertaining! However, if you’ve got limited time to spend, now is definitely the time to make certain you’re thoroughly familiar with the new standard for web accessibility. It’s actually final.
So, Joe Clark — web accessibility guru, now retired from the field — is publishing a new book. The new book is on what could be considered an obscure field, except for the minor detail that approximately 33,383,245 people deal with the subject every day.
The name of the book is Organizing Our Marvellous Neighbours: How to Feel Good About Canadian English, and the subject is the peculiarities of English spelling in (you guessed it) Canada.
The number referenced above was modified down for the French speaking population who don’t know English (3 people) and modifed up for the number of non-Canadians concerned with Canadian spelling (3). 
I’m sure that there are people out there who will buy the book because they are truly concerned with the intricacies of spelling in Canadian; for myself, I’m going to buy it because it sounds entertaining.
The book isn’t available yet, but I’m sure it will be before I publish a new post (September 25th, according to certain sources), so I’ll update this post with an appropriate link at that time.
No legal definitions established today, I’m afraid to say. Although this is a victory on behalf of the claimants, who were awarded substantive damages on their claim, there was no establishment of any kind of legal precedent.
This is primarily due to one singular item in the settlement:
- No Admission of Liability. By agreeing to and voluntarily entering into this Agreement, there is no admission or concession by Target, direct or indirect, express or implied, that Target.com is in any way inaccessible or that Target has violated the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code §§ 51 et seq., the Disabled Persons Act, California Civil Code §§ 54 et seq., the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181 et seq., or any other federal, state, or local law, regulation, order, or rule.
National Federation of the Blind vs. Target Corporation, Final Settlement
This statement clearly delineates a complete denial that there were any contradictions of law involved in the Target.com suit.
Ah, well. It is still a victory!
Quietly released on the Saturday before Christmas, (what, are they trying to hide this news?) Google announced that their latest Toolbar release supports the Windows Accessibility API.
This is (obviously) a Windows-specific release, and even further, it’s just an Internet Explorer release. However, it’s definitely a step in the right direction! I was particularly glad to see the comment:
Version 5 comes as a part of our ongoing efforts to enhance accessibility in our client-side and web applications, which is a matter I hardly need to mention is very important. Jonas Klink, Software Engineer, Accessibility
(Emphasis added.)
Now, as many have commented, the accessibility level of much of Google’s code is atrocious. I like the idea that Google is actively invested in improving the accessibility of their products; but I have yet to see any serious evidence of this effort!
Still, in the holiday spirit, I will raise a glass to Google to encourage their accessibility efforts. (And if, as a side effect, I end up a little bit drunker, I will accept that.) 
For a major issue in accessibility, I have to say that this really hasn’t seen much press. Granted, major lawsuits tend to move slowly — - glacially, you might say. However, given the fact that the last announcement concerning the National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corporation lawsuit was in September of 2006, you’d expect some kind of blog coverage on the latest announcement.
In fact, I found it difficult to find anything about it at all, at first — - I only became aware of it because I was talking to a web development manager from Target. (Articles are now easy to find via Google News.)
At any rate, the major news is that the lawsuit has been granted federal class-action status.
Granting class-action status allows blind people throughout the country who have tried to access Target.com to become plaintiffs in the suit, which alleges violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Associated Press
Further, the Judge (Marilyn Patel) ruled that changes in Target’s web site since the date of filing do not provide grounds for dismissal of the suit.
Judge Patel’s order Friday noted that Target has modified its Web site some since the suit’s filing to make the site more accessible to the blind. Target claimed the suit should therefore be dismissed, but Judge Patel ruled against that argument. Associated Press
Turning the suit into a class action may place additional pressure on businesses to start considering web accessibility a priority. One can hope, at any rate!
See also: Update: Target ruling may force retailers to adjust Web sites (Computer World)
Return to Top
