W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > June 2020

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-color-adjust-1][mediaqueries-5] Fold `forced-colors` and `prefers-contrast`? (#3856)

From: James Craig via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:29:50 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-642319215-1591831789-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
> Using @media (prefers-contrast) evaluates true for everything except `no-preference`

I understand this, and I was heavily involved in defining this behavior with `prefers-reduced-motion` in order to keep the syntax flexible. (E.g. it could also match something more specific in the future if needed like `no-parallax`). 

The `no-preference` boolean behavior also worked well with the original proposal for contrast, which was:

`prefers-increased-contrast: [no-preference] | increase | high`

But now with name change and the addition of `low` and `forced` a boolean match for “prefers contrast” can also mean:

- low, aka “does not prefer contrast”
- forced, which is not conveying a preference for the author to style but a state that the author is forced to deal with and should react to.

IMO, `forced-colors` is a much better landing spot and naming convention for this concept.

GitHub Notification of comment by cookiecrook
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3856#issuecomment-642319215 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2020 23:29:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:42:09 UTC