So Google Material Design fails accessibility when it comes to links right?
Google Material Design
So their flat button (no button image, just the text) and even the blue links in the table next to usage.
W3C's F73 issue
The objective of this failure is to avoid situations in which people who cannot perceive color differences cannot identify links (when people with color vision can identify links). Link underlines or some other non-color visual distinction are required (when the links are discernible to those with color vision).
And for their regular blue text link
With this technique, a relative luminance (lightness) difference of 3:1 or greater with the text around it can be used if additional visual confirmation is available when a user points or tabs to the link. Visual highlights may, for example, take the form of underline, a change in font style such as bold or italics, or an increase in font size.
While using this technique is sufficient to meet this success criteria, it is not the preferred technique to differentiate link text. This is because links that use the relative luminance of color alone may not be obvious to people with black/white color blindness. If there are not a large number of links in the block of text, underlines are recommended for links.
And Material doesn't do anything like have the text bold, underline, etc. when you roll over it (on the links, on the buttons the state changes).
And this is not to mention mobile. You won't have a state change on mobile due to lack of hover. So it would break down even more.
Reason I am bringing this up, is that my company uses Google Material design, and I am doing a UX and accessibility review. It looks like the problem is with Material Design, however. Or am I missing something? I have a hard time believing someone like Google would ignore accessibility requirements, but they have also used things like red links in Gmail before. So I'm a little lost.
submitted by /u/bubba-natep