Lets make sure we are doing everything listed here: [#769692]

Comments

bleen’s picture

bleen commented
Priority: Critical » Normal

SO FAR...

Browser Support

* Themes must be cross-browser tested and look as similar as possible in standards compliant browsers. - This is obviously an ongoing process, but that will always be true
* Non-standards compliant browsers down to IE6 are still supported (for now) and therefore must "function." This means that layouts must not break, and obvious differences/bugs should be worked out. It also means, for example, that using border-radius to create rounded corners is perfectly acceptable and browsers that don't support this (lte IE8) are fine without them.

Drupal Coding Standards

* Coding Standards must be adhered to.
* CSS Coding standards, while still a draft, should be adhered to as much as possible. - Except where standards are still being debated, we're good!
* Template files should not exist in the theme unless they have been changed.
* Template files should not remove critical RDF/Accessibility functionality. - JohnAlbin is heading up some further accessibility checks
* Default regions should be used where possible (as opposed to creating new similar ones with different names)

Theme Features

* A print stylesheet must be included
* RTL styles must be added
* Color module must be supported
* Custom theme settings are not allowed (per webchick in D7) - Ok, ok .. we removed them :)
* Overlay must be supported
* Primary and secondary links need to be supported
* At least one additional region for navigation and content-related blocks

Web Standards, Validation & Accessibility

* Markup must be standards compliant - I checked 8 pages at random and all passed
* Must pass XHTML 1.0 Strict validation - we pass XHTML + RDFa
* CSS must validate under profile level 3 (CSS3), with the exception of browser extensions I turned on css aggregation and checked the same 8 pages.... all passed
* Compliance with WCAG 2.0 level AA should be the target, including:
Note: This does not apply to issues caused by Drupal core.

I dont know how to check this last one yet ^

bleen’s picture

bleen commented
Priority: Normal » Critical
aspilicious’s picture

aspilicious commented

what else has to been done? (except the last thing)

bleen’s picture

bleen commented

There are obviously some things still in the Bartik issue queue (the most important have been marked critical) but according to the list at [#769692] we're doing really well. That last item (WCAG) will likely be handled as part of JohnAlbin's accessibility efforts

snorkers’s picture

snorkers commented
Status: Active » Reviewed & tested by the community

So this issue in itself is not actually critical anymore then? It looks like the only barriers to being a candidate theme are the other Bartick critical issues (2 others remaining this afternoon) and issues in core.
The only remaining item is the WCAG compliance is this is a massive core issue, not yet this theme's (http://drupal.org/project/issues/drupal?text=wcag&status=All&priorities=...). Standards compliant markup is a question mark, but that should be a separate issue in its own right, and you can't really take this forward until core theming is complete (see earlier issue queue link).
I would close this issue, but believe this is the privilege of the theme maintainer or @bleen18. We had some healthy discussion at a code sprint on this issue, so feel it's been pretty comprehensively reviewed.
Well done on checking the list off!

bleen’s picture

bleen commented
Status: Reviewed & tested by the community » Needs work

I would love to mark this as closed, but I just used the color contrast add-on for FF and it returned 3 fails on the homepage. One is definitely part of the toolbar/shortcut css but the other two need to be fixed in Bartik (I think ... this stuff is new to me)

DIV

class: meta submitted
  • HTML.js
  • BODY.html.front.logged-in.two-sidebars.page-node.toolbar.toolbar-drawer
  • DIV#page-wrapper
  • DIV#page
  • DIV#main-wrapper.clearfix
  • DIV#main.clearfix
  • DIV#content.column
  • DIV.section
  • DIV.region.region-content
  • DIV#block-system-main.block.block-system.first.last.odd
  • DIV.content
  • DIV#node-1.node.node-article.node-promoted.node-teaser.contextual-links-region.clearfix
 Sample #a8a8a8 #ffffff 2.38:1 (fail)
SPAN
  • HTML.js
  • BODY.html.front.logged-in.two-sidebars.page-node.toolbar.toolbar-drawer
  • DIV#page-wrapper
  • DIV#page
  • DIV#main-wrapper.clearfix
  • DIV#main.clearfix
  • DIV#content.column
  • DIV.section
  • DIV.region.region-content
  • DIV#block-system-main.block.block-system.first.last.odd
  • DIV.content
  • DIV#node-1.node.node-article.node-promoted.node-teaser.contextual-links-region.clearfix
  • DIV.meta.submitted
 Sample #a8a8a8 #ffffff 2.38:1 (fail)
Jeff Burnz’s picture

Jeff Burnz commented

I think we should keep in mind that AA is a target, not an absolute requirement. I say this because to meet AA requirements across the board will mean each color scheme will be, most likely, high contrast. As a designer I am personally against AA color and contrast being a hard requirement for core themes because of this.

I do support the idea of including at least one very high contrast color scheme (something I have floated in the Corolla issue queue).

There is really only one fully reliable tool that I know of (there may be others) and thats the Color Contrast Analyzer available here (under Resources) http://www.accessibleinfo.org.au/

snorkers’s picture

snorkers commented

So this looks like a separate issue, rather than a something that will prevent Bartik being included in D7.
I tried out a few other themes in the Colour Contrast Checker on the home page too and they all have some failures, mostly in the 'Colour' category. So on a relative scale, this theme is pretty close to the aspirational standard of D7, especially if you are comparing to Garland.

Bartick (DEV) Results: 
Failures
Luminosity Contrast Ratio	1
Difference in Brightness	4
Difference in Colour	21
Seven (DEV) Results: 
Failures
Luminosity Contrast Ratio	1
Difference in Brightness	1
Difference in Colour	6
Stark (DEV) Results: 
Failures
Luminosity Contrast Ratio	1
Difference in Brightness	1
Difference in Colour	3
Garland (DEV) Results: 
Failures
Luminosity Contrast Ratio	4
Difference in Brightness	5
Difference in Colour	19

Still think this issue #777700: Check Bartik against the Candidate Theme Req Issue (meta issue) has no longer valid and should be closed. Raise a fresh one relating to 'Colour difference' if there is more work to do on this... but it certainly should be more than 'Normal' status.

Jeff Burnz’s picture

Jeff Burnz commented

I see people tagging issues with "major", in lieu of no in-between priority.

jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented

I increased contrast on a lot of elements in Bartik over the last couple weeks. Could someone test it again?

jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented
Status: Needs work » Fixed

Check Bartik against the Candidate Theme Req Issue (meta issue) is done :)
Congrats everyone, we accomplished this list and got Bartik into core.

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.