Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Replying to comments about our web page design

research.exoticsilicon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 211 posts

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#201

Post by toomanyrichies »

JohnFen wrote: post #200
toomanyrichies wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may be referring to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act [1], which: > ...requires federal agencies and any institution that receives federal funding to make electronic technology and information equally accessible for individuals with disabilities. This means that an organization's website must have all features just as accessible for individuals with disabilities as these features are for individuals without…

> federal agencies and any institution that receives federal funding I don't think that website is either a US federal agency or receives any US federal funding.

> I don't think that website is either a US federal agency or receives any US federal funding.

IMHO it's hard to tell either way, because their website wasn't designed with ease-of-use in mind.

That said, here's some facts I was able to gather on their business:

> Whilst IT research remains our primary focus, we now offer executive high-end commercial IT services to organisations with unique problems to solve.

> ...we also have a large body of knowledge of older systems, many of which have now gone full-circle and fallen into disuse, technology that has been abandoned and forgotten. We occasionally do projects involving those, especially when nobody else seems to remember how they worked. Our knowledge-base includes legacy programming languages such as Fortran, data conversion from obscure file formats, and even assembly language coding on various platforms.

Based on these quotes, I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that they have clients in government.

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#203

Post by JohnFen »

toomanyrichies wrote: post #201
JohnFen wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> federal agencies and any institution that receives federal funding I don't think that website is either a US federal agency or receives any US federal funding.

> I don't think that website is either a US federal agency or receives any US federal funding. IMHO it's hard to tell either way, because their website wasn't designed with ease-of-use in mind. That said, here's some facts I was able to gather on their business: > Whilst IT research remains our primary focus, we now offer executive high-end commercial IT services to organisations with unique problems to solve. > ...w…

OK, your comment here made me gird my loins and actually put up with reading the rest of their website.

Anything is possible, I suppose, but everything I've seen on that site leads me to think it's not a company at all, but a personal hobbyist's website, or perhaps that of a hobbyist club.

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#204

Post by punyearthling »

I say this as an accessibility specialist - I think this site is fine. The authors have made a site that brings them joy and if they see customers dropping off and are fine with it, that’s OK.

For folks complaining of headaches or eye strain, browsers come equipped with forced-colors mode that enable you to choose your preferred color scheme.

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#205

Post by JohnFen »

kevincox wrote: post #77
blowski wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect they would reply with "resize your browser window".

This is shockingly common but do these people resize their window for every site they visit? Or they keep the window narrow and then sites with side navigation need to put it somewhere else? Having a large window should be telling the site "you have this space, make the best of it". Maybe it would be nice to have a built-in CSS property for "desired reading text width" but I think most people can pick a number and it…

> This is shockingly common but do these people resize their window for every site they visit?

I don't. I never use my browser full-screen, but I do size it in whatever way makes it work with whatever else I have going on on my desktop. Usually, this is a very small window.

If that makes a site unusable, and if the site isn't essential, then I just move on to a different site. I'm not going to rearrange things just to accommodate the whims of some random web designer.

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#206

Post by nkrisc »

nkrisc wrote: post #183
Poppys wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing Devil's advocate, if the themes are inaccessible, the user can always pick another one. Monochrome might provide the contrast ratio you want.

My recommendation is always accessible by default. If the default theme is not accessible, it may be difficult for the user to switch to one that is. It's so easy to make a site that is accessible - a blank HTML document with no CSS essentially is. It takes work to make a site that isn't.

Too late to edit but I didn't mean "blank" as in no content, that would be pretty pointless. Poor choice of words.

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#207

Post by toomanyrichies »

JohnFen wrote: post #203
toomanyrichies wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think that website is either a US federal agency or receives any US federal funding. IMHO it's hard to tell either way, because their website wasn't designed with ease-of-use in mind. That said, here's some facts I was able to gather on their business: > Whilst IT research remains our primary focus, we now offer executive high-end commercial IT services to organisations with unique problems to solve. > ...w…

OK, your comment here made me gird my loins and actually put up with reading the rest of their website. Anything is possible, I suppose, but everything I've seen on that site leads me to think it's not a company at all, but a personal hobbyist's website, or perhaps that of a hobbyist club.

Oh for sure, I definitely also get "hobbyist" vibes from this. I'm not in this thread to persuade anyone that this is a federal contractor's corporate page. My original comment was, more than anything, an attempt to answer the question "Which law?"

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#208

Post by LanternLight83 »

nhanb wrote: post #2

I've always liked ExoticSilicon's design, but not until this post did I realize their smart bit of CSS for default font size: font-size: min(max(1em, 1.3vw), 1.3em); Which explains why it looks just right on my high-DPI Chromebook even though I haven't configured a big enough default font size for the browser. This is going to be the default font-size for all of my websites now (preceded by a fallback for maximum com…

I've always loved the site too c:

Re: Replying to comments about our web page design

#210

Post by ryandrake »

tedunangst wrote: post #145
jrm4 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it wildly ridiculous that we've more or less abandoned the practically simple idea of "the web is text, so just let people render the text how they want in their browsers. " Yet another reminder of the overblown nature of UX/UI in general. Given the current push for accessibility, seems like "make the text accessible" should be the goal above all else.

But the text is all there? Is there some sort of DRM embedded in the html that prevents you from rendering it how you'd like?

Browsers are dropping the ball. Yes, You can disable styles, and dig through settings to configure proper rendering. But browsers are 1. Defaulting to giving web designers control and 2. Are hiding the overrides deeper and deeper in settings.

The browser should default to your operating system’s default color scheme, text size, and font face, and no CSS. There should be a setting somewhere you can opt in to “let the web site decide these things.”

Post reply on HN