- From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:23:47 +0900
- To: Daniel Barclay <daniel@fgm.com>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
Hello Daniel, On Aug 16, 2006, at 23:34 , Daniel Barclay wrote: > You're right that your contrast reduction is fairly small. > > I guess my concern is amplified because I have been encountering many > W3C QA web pages with bad designs and usability problems Feel free to suggest fixes, I'm sure they will be welcome, more so than complaints ;) > (e.g., > fixed-positioned menus that hide content These are not in the more recent page design of our pages, and the older ones are being "refreshed" whenever we have a chance. > uses of "overflow: auto" that force the user to > scroll horizontaly much more than otherwise necessary I find it a reasonable tradeoff, especially since most of the text which is in <pre> with overflow:auto is there to be copy-pasted rather than read, and in such a context I think overflow:auto makes sense. Would be happy to hear others' opinions on the matter. > My concern is that the W3C QA group is increasingly presenting bad > design examples on their web pages I'd appreciate if you could justify your usage of "increasingly". Maybe *you* are finding an increasing number of things that annoy you, but I think the design and usability of the QA web pages has been improving over the years. If you don't think that's the case, I'd like factual evidence of it. thank you -- olivier
Received on Friday, 18 August 2006 02:22:59 UTC