Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It is best to choose background colors that offer sufficient contrast in relation to text and blue links, which is also the color of references, both of which are very common in most articles. Use the WCAG link contrast checker to ensure that the chosen background color offers the recommended WCAG AA level of contrast against normal text ...
An example of how text with low colour-contrast appear to someone with the commonest form of colour-blindness, red/green. If you have default settings on Wikipedia, and are reading this page on a screen, then you probably can't read the following: This is a secret message. because it has blue text on a blue background.
You can use a few online tools to check color contrasts, including: the WebAIM online contrast checker, or the WhoCanUse site, or Snook's Color Contrast Check. Several other tools exist on the web, but check if they are up-to-date before using them. Several tools are based on WCAG 1.0's algorithm, while the reference is now WCAG 2.0's algorithm.
WCAG 2.0 text contrast ratios Font size Not Compliant Level AA Level AAA Normal < 4.5 4.5 to 7.0 > 7.0 Large (18 pt or 14 pt bold) ... Colour Contrast Check;
WCAG 2.0 uses the same three levels of conformance (A, AA, AAA) as WCAG 1.0, but has redefined them. The WCAG working group maintains an extensive list of web accessibility techniques and common failure cases for WCAG 2.0. [24] WCAG 2.1 is backwards-compatible with WCAG 2.0, which it extends with a further 17 success criteria.
You can check contrast level using the WebAIM contrast checker by setting the foreground color to the blue link color. Contrast should be at the minimum WCAG AA level and, whenever possible, at WCAG AAA level. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Colors has a set of colors that comply with WCAG AAA and WCAG AA for unvisited links and normal ...
Discover the best free online games at AOL.com - Play board, card, casino, puzzle and many more online games while chatting with others in real-time.
In articles such as "WCAG 2.0: The new W3C guidelines evaluated", [9] "To Hell with WCAG 2.0" [10] and "Testability Costs Too Much", [11] the WAI has been criticised for allowing WCAG 1.0 to get increasingly out of step with today's technologies and techniques for creating and consuming web content, for the slow pace of development of WCAG 2.0 ...