101–110 of 117 posts
First thing that came to mind was the Slackware Linux website [0] style (which hasn't changed since I last looked at it in early 2000's) [0]: www.slackware.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also an accessibility issue. People with astigmatism might have a hard time with bright text over dark background. https://medium.com/@h_locke/why-dark-mode-causes-more-access...
As someone with astigmatism, I prefer dark modes in almost all places as long as it's done correctly. Bright screens with dark text cause significantly more eyestrain for me. My wife also has astigmatism and prefers light backgrounds with dark text. For the same reasons. I think the key here for accessibility is choice.
So this is the way you're supposed to use it? Is this accessible? GitHub npm CDN
Only if you want a hyperlink that looks like a button. It's the only way I was able to do it in a classless way, but I'm open to other ideas.
It looks fine, and I guess it's going for a theme, but I actively disagree with removing the color from links. Making a link and underlined text completely indistinguishable is a bad idea for usability. That alone makes this something I would never drop-in to a simple site.
"Vigorously styled hyperlinks on a page tend to move to the foreground of a reader’s attention, like an HDTV in a hotel bar. [...] The red circle is meant to be noticeable while you’re reading the sentence that contains the link. Otherwise it disappears, so as not to distract."
I think I used MVP.css? It was definitely one of the ones from that GitHub list that's already linked here, at the time I checked them all.
It looks fine, and I guess it's going for a theme, but I actively disagree with removing the color from links. Making a link and underlined text completely indistinguishable is a bad idea for usability. That alone makes this something I would never drop-in to a simple site.
[1]: https://github.com/naiyerasif/site/blob/1d43c689c7c4035e2e02...
As it is often said in various designer forums, please avoid pure white (#FFFFFF) on black (here #111111), as it makes the text glow for the human eyes (therefore making it unreadable for long text). Instead, try to lower a bit the contrast on the text color. Also, the dispositions for the buttons at the beginning (GitHub, NPM, ...) are not adjusted correctly for keyboard navigation (each button requires two tabs). A…
If you want an objective measure for this, see APCA: https://www.myndex.com/APCA/?BG=000000&TXT=ffffff&DEV=G4g&BU...
From https://git.apcacontrast.com/documentation/APCA_in_a_Nutshel...: "Lc 90 is a suggested maximum for very large and bold fonts (greater than 36px bold), and large areas of color". White on black scores Lc 108.
It's the likely future replacement for the standard WCAG2 contrast checker (which becomes really inaccurate for dark mode and I don't think makes any suggestion about maximum contrast).
water.css[0] and pico.css[1] are some of my favorite classless css libraries. There's a full list of them here: https://github.com/dbohdan/classless-css [0]: https://watercss.kognise.dev/ [1]: https://picocss.com/
Water looks nice, I've not used that before. I usually use https://classless.de because it supports theming, so I can add the bare minimum CSS to make it feel like a different site to another of my sites using it.
Would this be more correctly called a CSS "stylesheet"? Calling it a "CSS framework" really sent me in a loop trying to figure out what "framework" means.
What you said is literally "Cascading Style Sheets stylesheet". Stick with "framework".