- From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:37:10 +0000
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- CC: LVTF - low-vision-a11y <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <7560FB47-C45F-4725-8E7B-97E0ED906797@levelaccess.com>
The shaded example is better for me. The other looks more like buttons. I also note that the City, state, and zip fields will likely be missing visual label once data is entered. I could not test in high contrast because the links are images but I would be curious to know if that is supported. Jonathan Sent from my iPhone On May 9, 2018, at 7:25 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote: Hi everyone, The new version of Google’s material design was released today(ish), and I have a question. In the usage section [3] for text inputs are two side-by-side examples (under “choosing the right text field”), I’d like to know if either appears easier to see & understand? There isn’t a direct anchor in the page, but the two images are: 1. https://material.io/design/assets/172e_wQpXZN14fNFnK8SytESS_hJDn6Si/textfields-type-filled.png 2. https://material.io/design/assets/1Kezf2nmTVbQdOfNajrotDxeIKs1WlwHl/textfields-type-stroke.png I suggest resizing until it’s around the physical size of a phone screen. One of these fits the non-text contrast guideline better (but worse for text-contrast), but which is better for LV folks? Kind regards, -Alastair 1] https://material.io/design/components/text-fields.html#usage -- www.nomensa.com<http://www.nomensa.com/> tel: +44 (0)117 929 7333 / 07970 879 653 follow us: @we_are_nomensa or me: @alastc Nomensa Ltd. King William House, 13 Queen Square, Bristol BS1 4NT Company number: 4214477 | UK VAT registration: GB 771727411
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2018 11:37:44 UTC