Adrian Roselli, pH0APCA is no longer part of WCAG3. You can still use it, but for conformance (legal, policy, etc.) reasons you will still need to follow WCAG2. It’s possible to satisfy both in most cases.
Fabien@fabienmarry
Didn’t get needed support:
https://github.com/w3c/silver/pull/663#issuecomment-1408914402
Related to patents, IP, challenges to the methodology, and contributor behavior.
Greg Kaplan@aardrian @fabienmarry @Saint_loup @marcedwards ugh, thats disappointing. In the big corporate world the current color contrast rules lead to abhorrent combinations. Due to design-by-committee processes these combos get pushed through because they meet the requirements to use brand colors and be “compliant”. At least with APCA there’s be fewer bad combinations pushed through.
For those looking to comply with both, https://www.myndex.com/BPCA/ may help. Or just trust your designers have good taste 😤
Myndex 🔵@kaplag @aardrian @fabienmarry @Saint_loup @marcedwards
To be clear: everything was removed from WCAG 3 as the entire WCAG 3 document was started again from the ground up.
Also, the version of APCA that was in the initial release of WCAG 3 was not at all the current version, and having it in there was causing confusion.
It is unknown when WCAG 3 will become a working document. But the need for a coherent readability standard is ever present.
The active APCA document is the APCA Readabilty Criterion, published by the non-profit Inclusive Reading Technologies:
@aardrian @fabienmarry @Saint_loup @marcedwards
Adrian, if by "contributor behavior" you mean the contributor (me) defending myself against the slander, doxxing, lies, and rumors I've endured from a small group of trolls? Your support of their ableist bullying is so noted.
*Everything* was removed from WCAG3, and it has nothing to do with patents, IP, or anything else. Everything was removed because WCAG3 was started again from the ground up. Also, the APCA that was in the WCAG3 early draft was a placeholder, and not at all the current APCA.
There is no "WCAG3" as a working usable document at this time, and its future is unknown. Meanwhile WCAG2 contrast methods are harmful junk pseudoscience, with no peer review, unaddressed objections when created in 2007, and not relevant for modern web content by any means.
To address these shortcomings, the current APCA Readability Criterion is published as a free-to-use standard by Inclusive Reading Technologies, a non-profit.