W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org > September 2017

Re: Another NNGroup post on the problems with Flat design.

From: Steve Lee <steve@opendirective.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 11:19:21 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEsWMvTPOB5md4p9dGUqRwJj6JdXLDUoiDUxX0uTnwaVrpHf4Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
Cc: "chagnon@pubcom.com" <chagnon@pubcom.com>, public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
The loss of clear affordances is the big issue I see. It's just not
clear what parts of the page are interactive. You often have to
explore if the interactability is not obvious from the text (perhaps
this comes form games players who are also devs). Plus exploring can
be a real problem for some users.

I do osee some UIs are adding subtle animations to indicate an action
is occuring though, but that's after the event :)

Steve Lee
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com


On 6 September 2017 at 11:14, Michael Pluke
<Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com> wrote:
> I entirely agree with the second part of this – that the biggest problem
> with today’s “flat design” solutions is the lack of contrast.
>
>
>
> However, I’m not entirely convinced that the removal of “visual clutter”
> like drop shadows is always a straight benefit for accessibility. Things
> like shadows and bevelling have often been used to clearly indicate the
> activation of a control. For example, when a control is activated the
> shadows are often changed to give the impression that the control has
> physically moved. This provides some immediate feedback that the control has
> been successfully activated. In my experience, I do not often get such clear
> and obvious feedback on many modern UI designs.
>
>
>
> This type of clear success feedback is particularly reassuring for any
> people with cognitive disabilities who are uncomfortable with uncertainty.
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> From: Chagnon | PubCom [mailto:chagnon@pubcom.com]
> Sent: 05 September 2017 15:36
> To: 'Steve Lee' <steve@opendirective.com>; 'public-cognitive-a11y-tf'
> <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
> Subject: RE: Another NNGroup post on the problems with Flat design.
>
>
>
> It's not the "Flat Design" that's the problem. That just means that visual
> clutter has been removed, such as drop shadows and beveled 3-D sculpted
> buttons.
>
> That actually benefits accessibility.
>
> The problem is the lack of visual contrast that is now in vogue with
> designers (and I'm speaking as a professional designer). It has nothing to
> do with the "flat design" theory, but is being built into websites,
> software, digital media, and graphic design along with the flat concept.
>
> Grey text on a grey background isn't "flat design." It's just plain stupid
> and unreadable.
>
> --Bevi Chagnon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Lee [mailto:steve@opendirective.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 4, 2017 2:23 PM
> To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
> Subject: Another NNGroup post on the problems with Flat design.
>
> "Flat UI Elements Attract Less Attention and Cause Uncertainty"
>
> https://www.nngroup.com/articles/flat-ui-less-attention-cause-uncertainty
>
> Steve Lee
> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 6 September 2017 10:19:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 6 September 2017 10:19:45 UTC