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

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

From: Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 16:23:21 +0000
To: Steve Lee <steve@opendirective.com>
CC: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>, "chagnon@pubcom.com" <chagnon@pubcom.com>
Message-ID: <e84c2998698d412e9ce89818434a11a5@E15NYDAG-D27N03.sh11.lan>
Could very well be true! I like to be a trend setter ☺

Mike

From: Steve Lee [mailto:steve@opendirective.com]
Sent: 06 September 2017 13:42
To: Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
Cc: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>; chagnon@pubcom.com
Subject: RE: Another NNGroup post on the problems with Flat design.

That's got to be the first time someone used 'fun and 'tax in the same sentence! :)
Steve Lee
Sent from my mobile device Please excuse typing errors

On 6 Sep 2017 12:07, "Michael Pluke" <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com<mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>> wrote:
I totally agree – loss of clear affordances that distinguish interactive from non-interactive elements on a page is probably the biggest issue of all.

I’m sure that influence from games design has been a big factor, but that is so wrong. Part of the fun of many games is the discovery that you can interact with an element in a scene. When the task is something like filling in an online tax form, the “fun” of not knowing how to interact with the form rapidly turns into frustration and/or panic!

A long time back when I was working directly with designers they were really keen to apply the whizzy techniques that they found in various games to productivity oriented applications. Losing all visible signs that an element was interactive seemed to be a badge of honour. They loved how beautifully uncluttered this invisible UI was! Fortunately I was able to resist their ideas at the time – but it seems now that the lunatics have taken over the asylum ☺

Mike

From: Steve Lee [mailto:steve@opendirective.com<mailto:steve@opendirective.com>]
Sent: 06 September 2017 11:19
To: Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com<mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>>
Cc: chagnon@pubcom.com<mailto:chagnon@pubcom.com>; public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org<mailto:public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Another NNGroup post on the problems with Flat design.

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><mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com%3e> 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><mailto:steve@opendirective.com%3e>; 'public-cognitive-a11y-tf'
> <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org><mailto:public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org%3e>
> 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><mailto:public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org%3e>
> 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 16:23:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 6 September 2017 16:23:49 UTC