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

Contrast Rebellion

contrastrebellion.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 151 posts

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#51

Post by denton-scratch »

mkidd wrote: post #42

This is a huge pet peeve for me. Shouldn't this be a “solved” style problem in 2023! I'd gladly fire every tenth web designer responsible for this problem regardless of their other merits. Small fonts are one thing. There are browser hot keys to change the font size. And I'm a huge fan of the "Zoom Text Only" option in Firefox where the rest of page doesn't go flying off the edge of my viewing area. But low contrast…

> Shouldn't this be a “solved” style problem in 2023!

Grey-on-grey text is idiotic. It's everywhere. So is scroll-jacking; so is weird animations on text articles (The Guardian does this from time to time). So is web-pages that come up as a sheet of whiteness, if you don't want to run javascript indiscriminately (REACT, I think). So is megabytes of script, just to display a page of text.

This kind of stuff is weenie web-developers, showing off. I used to do that - in 2001. It's fun. But I wasn't designing high-profile websites with important text content.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#52

Post by least »

JJMcJ wrote: post #48
NikolaNovak wrote: post #46

I'm always amused by HackerNews being presented as this awful, unreadable, low-contrast atrocity, when it is the most user-friendly, easiest-to-read, most seamlessly customizable thing I access on literally any given day. That being said, yes; awful low-contrast sites exist. But it's not, hah, black and white. There's certainly such a thing as too high of a contrast - depending on the person, monitor, and background…

HN has the better choice. If you don't want stark look of black on white, change the background color, not the font color. Not quite sure what the point of some comments being in lower contrast.

The comments in lower contrast are ones that have been downvoted. The more it is downvoted the less and less visible it becomes. It's clever but it makes the site less accessible.

But other elements, including submission text like in an Ask HN thread are also too low contrast.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#53

Post by jonplackett »

I agree with the contrast rebellion

But it’s a bit ironic that this website is impossible to read on mobile because the font is TINY - my other massive pet peeve as a person without particularly good vision.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#54

Post by cratermoon »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #46

I'm always amused by HackerNews being presented as this awful, unreadable, low-contrast atrocity, when it is the most user-friendly, easiest-to-read, most seamlessly customizable thing I access on literally any given day. That being said, yes; awful low-contrast sites exist. But it's not, hah, black and white. There's certainly such a thing as too high of a contrast - depending on the person, monitor, and background…

The fonts on HN are a bit small. I have my browser set for HN to get a 125% magnification.

The comment text is a nice #000000, but the rest of the text is #828282, which is insufficiently contrasty. Lighthouse flags this, as well as some other accessibility issues.

I notice that on mobile the front page will sometimes have tiny text and if I reload then it will be larger. I'm not sure why the non-deterministic behavior there.

The line length of about 144 is uncomfortably long. It should be about half that. Line height of 1.5 would improve readability as well.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#55

Post by denton-scratch »

wildrhythms wrote: post #17
nahuel0x wrote: post #9

Not only text... take Whatsapp, used by all people with a cellphone in the world, whose sent and read check marks are distinguished only by a subtle change of color instead of having different icons.

I work with graphic/UI designers and I have to be the one to advocate for using more than color to differentiate states, and to meet acceptable contrast ratios. And don't get me started on hiding things behind hard to discover hover states. The managers who are supposed to oversee the development of these products don't give a shit about accessibility. Sad state of affairs.

> The managers who are supposed to oversee the development

Yeah, I can understand kids wanting to play with whatever's new in HTML5 etc. But I don't get why the manager in charge of the project doesn't say "Yes, very cool; but it's unreadable if there's sun-glare. Fix it, please."

Well, I do sort of get it; the manager's a kid too, and he likes custom controls and "distinctive" typography as much as the developer, and doesn't know anything about accessbility. I'm not talking about real accessibility; I just mean ordinary people being able to access the content.

Yeah, you can say "fuck it, I'll go somewhere else". But a lot of sites that I rely on have unique content.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#56

Post by gnicholas »

> sometimes we only think about aesthetics. Clearly, aesthetics are important but aren't the ultimate goal of design.

Exactly — we get caught up in form over function. The goal of text is to be readable, not to look pretty.

Text display formats like BeeLine are aesthetically nontraditional (to put it kindly), but from a readability perspective they are a godsend for many readers. [1] BeeLine is typically offered as a user-configurable option, and most sites with BeeLine have it off by default. But some sites have found it to be so helpful at increasing engagement that they actually turn it on by default. As one user put it: "it's ugly, but it works!".

1: http://www.beelinereader.com [disclosure: I am the founder]

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#57

Post by ben_w »

Kwpolska wrote: post #49
NikolaNovak wrote: post #46

I'm always amused by HackerNews being presented as this awful, unreadable, low-contrast atrocity, when it is the most user-friendly, easiest-to-read, most seamlessly customizable thing I access on literally any given day. That being said, yes; awful low-contrast sites exist. But it's not, hah, black and white. There's certainly such a thing as too high of a contrast - depending on the person, monitor, and background…

The default font size on HN is unreadable, and has issues with contrast, especially with downvoted or text posts.

> especially with downvoted or text posts.

I think making them unreadable is the point?

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#58

Post by rcme »

ben_w wrote: post #57
Kwpolska wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The default font size on HN is unreadable, and has issues with contrast, especially with downvoted or text posts.

> especially with downvoted or text posts. I think making them unreadable is the point?

I agree for downvoted posts, but why do text submissions need to be unreadable?

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#59

Post by Kwpolska »

ben_w wrote: post #57
Kwpolska wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The default font size on HN is unreadable, and has issues with contrast, especially with downvoted or text posts.

> especially with downvoted or text posts. I think making them unreadable is the point?

Why would text posts be made unreadable?

As for downvoted posts, eh, it would be better to collapse them by default or something instead of showing them but making them unreadable.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#60

Post by detaro »

rcme wrote: post #58
ben_w wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> especially with downvoted or text posts. I think making them unreadable is the point?

I agree for downvoted posts, but why do text submissions need to be unreadable?

I think it originally was meant to discourage those too (they also get a ranking penalty afaik), since HN should primarily be a link site.

It's a bit off though, since it e.g. also applies to the "officially selected" Launch HN: posts.

Post reply on HN