Hi @remanuel! That’s a great question on the color contrast aspect and one that I’ve asked myself before too. Technically speaking, WCAG doesn’t require inactive UI controls to follow the color contrast requirements (https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/quickref/#contrast-minimum). Where it says “except for the following” (i.e. doesn’t apply to these cases) it mentions this:
Incidental: Text or images of text that are part of an inactive user interface component, that are pure decoration, that are not visible to anyone, or that are part of a picture that contains significant other visual content, have no contrast requirement.
There’s a number of articles that try to explain this like the UX Movement that states, “Disabled buttons are signified by the lack of contrast to the text label. When a button is hard to read, users don’t bother with it, which is the intent of a disabled button. Not to mention, the contrast requirement does not apply to inactive components.” However, I can see both sides to the debate. On one hand, it might be more challenging for users with low vision to distinguish disabled elements from non-disabled elements if disabled elements meet color contrast. On the other, I could understand the argument that users should still be aware of these elements and have some other method to know that they’re disabled. I’ve even seen discussions about it in the Silver task force in working on WCAG 3.0 so that standard may change in the future.
I think it would make sense for now to follow the current standard, but I would love to talk to users that this impacts and get their input!
