- From: James Craig via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 03:24:57 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
So as I see it, the primary argument in for keeping `prefers-contrast: forced` is based on a causation versus correlation fallacy. There is an assumption that all people with forced colors want some form of reduced complexity. I don't believe this to be true, and I haven't seen any evidence presented to prove this assumption. - I do recognize there is a strong correlation between *higher* contrast and reduced visual complexity. This combination is common for low vision users with loss of clarity or reduced contrast perception. - I also recognize there is at least an anecdotal correlation between *lower* contrast and reduced visual complexity. There's no disagreement on the above two statements, and both of those relate to a contrast preference. But those aren't the justification for keeping `prefers-contrast: forced`. Instead the argument is this: > Premise: If users have custom colors whose contrast ratios match *neither* low contrast *nor* high contrast, every user in this group still wants reduced visual complexity. (???) I do not believe this ↑ premise is true. My gut feeling is that it's not true. I would assume this group of users just prefer to theme their Windows experience, and don't care about reduced complexity at all. Regardless, we don't know enough about this group of users to prove or disprove either assumption. In my opinion, if CSS needs a media feature for `prefers-reduced-complexity` or `prefers-improved-legibility`, the working group should consider those separately. -- GitHub Notification of comment by cookiecrook Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5433#issuecomment-716954148 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 27 October 2020 03:24:59 UTC