W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2002

RE: Color & contrast- response to Lee's message

From: Lee Roberts <leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 11:08:43 -0500
To: "'Web Content Guidelines'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NFBBJHFEOLAGEICMIMBPIEENCEAA.leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
Al,
You make a very interesting point although the remainder of you comments
seem to contradict the single point that stands out so heavily.

"Light diffuses, dark doesn't."
If light diffuses then that would mean that it is harder to read against a
dark background that doesn't diffuse.  The light simply gets squished, like
the article from Microsoft stated, when it is placed on a dark background.

However, you did make one point that will stand forever. "You won't want to
deny light on dark to those who need it and you won't want to burden those
who don't need it with this mode."  The question is how do we do that.  As
everyone has been pointing out ZoomEyes and the other programs have the
capability to show the page in reversed colors.  At least that is what I
have come to understand.

Thanks,
Lee

4.  Remember that the basic high contrast mode for text is light text on a
dark background.  In fact the conventional wisdom is yellow on black.  Stick
figures light on dark will preserve recognizability through more low pass
filtering than will more equal light-dark areas with less border length.  A
plus sign is more different from a circular disk than is a solid hexagon or
octagon.  Think in terms of how far the light has to fuzz to blend
indistinguishably into the fuzz it is meeting from the next light area.
Light diffuses, dark doesn't.  One of the factors or interface
transformations you should be thinking about is "at what point does the
interface go through a light-dark inversion phase boundary" between dark on
light and light on dark.  You won't want to deny light on dark to those who
need it and you won't want to burden those who don't need it with this mode.
And it's a discrete leap, not something that happens continuously.
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2002 12:06:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:19 GMT