Broken link #3745
Merged
Broken link #3745
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ <h4 id="related-focus">Relationship with Focus Visible</h4> | |||
| <figure id="figure-focus-outer-green"> | |||
| <img src="img/ntc-focus-outer-green.png" alt="Three blue buttons on a white background, the middle has a dark green outline outside of the botton's non-focused boundary." width="400" /> | |||
| <figcaption> | |||
| The external green indicator (#008000) does contrast with the white background (#FFF) which the component is on, <strong>passing</strong> the criterion. It does not need to contrast with both the component background and the component, as visually the effect is that the button is noticeably larger, and it's not necessary for a user to be able to discern this extra border in isolation. Although this passes non-text contrast, it is not a good indicator unless it is very thick. <span class="wcag22">There is a AAA criterion in WCAG 2.2 that addresses this aspect, <a href="../22/focus-appearance.html">Focus Appearance</a></span>. | |||
| The external green indicator (#008000) does contrast with the white background (#FFF) which the component is on, <strong>passing</strong> the criterion. It does not need to contrast with both the component background and the component, as visually the effect is that the button is noticeably larger, and it's not necessary for a user to be able to discern this extra border in isolation. Although this passes non-text contrast, it is not a good indicator unless it is very thick. <span class="wcag22">There is a AAA criterion in WCAG 2.2 that addresses this aspect, <a href="focus-appearance.html">Focus Appearance</a></span>. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@alastc coming in late, but ... should this not have been without the .html ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(as i think there's some magic xslt or whatever that turns links to SCs etc into proper links ... or are we explicitly trying to link to the understanding rather than the SC which doesn't have the magic happening?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Coming in even later: yes, the .html should have technically been removed as well, but is ultimately harmless, as the output files actually reside at that location (and the canonical URLs without .html are effectively rewritten)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.