- From: Antony Kennedy <antony@silversquid.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 19:37:42 +0100
- To: www-style@gtalbot.org
- Cc: "Markus Ernst" <derernst@gmx.ch>, "Dirk Schulze" <dschulze@adobe.com>, "W3C www-style mailing list" <www-style@w3.org>
> For people with disabilities or special needs, then an user stylesheet is > necessary. But should we really expect all users to write their own stylesheets? I agree, they should have the option. But I'd rather offer them a good solution where I still have a degree of control. On 17 Oct 2012, at 02:14, Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org> wrote: > > Le Lun 15 octobre 2012 6:22, Antony Kennedy a écrit : >> Agree. >> >> So, my overall points: >> >> 1) Sometimes design and business requirements exclude users or >> accessibility concerns. Alternate stylesheets provide a clever >> alternative. > > I do not understand (and do not agree with, do not support) this logic. > Business exclude users and accessibility concerns but author can/will > provide alternate stylesheets. > > >> 2) Although it is possible to create a website that satisfies (nearly) all >> WCAG guidelines, and allows text resizing and is friendly to user >> stylesheets etc, this can be constrictive to design and not everyone is >> technical enough to fix these things (nor should they have to be). I'm not >> saying this is a best-case scenario – we should code to guidelines >> whenever possible – but in the real world, brand guidelines and >> design/client requirements do not always make this possible. >> >> 3) To Gérard's point, yes it is possible to make a design that satisfies >> WCAG guidelines. My point was, this does not necessarily satisfy *user* >> requirements. > > I had only 2 main concerns: font-size that honors the user's settings and > sufficient color/brightness contrast. That's it. > >> Some users (like those with particular kinds of dyslexia) >> find high contrast designs hard to read. > > For people with disabilities or special needs, then an user stylesheet is > necessary. > >> Or white backgrounds' glare >> obstructs their view of the black text - even though this is at maximum >> contrast. > > On my own person website, 80% of all my webpages use light gray background > color. And I achieve sufficient color contrast. > >> There is simply not one stylesheet that will satisfy every >> user, and tools are not yet good enough to solve all of the problems for >> us without making the website hideous or illegible. > > Example given: http://cwilso.com/ > > Unstyled body text is set to 12px (normal <p>) at > http://cwilso.com/ > and the background color is dark ('background-color: #1B1814'), color is > 'color: #999;' (not even white!) these 2 factors combined make it > unnecessarly and frustratingly difficult to read. > > " > Success Criterion 1.4.3 of WCAG 2.0 requires the visual presentation of > text and images of text has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 > > (...) > Results for Luminosity Contrast Ratio > > The contrast ratio is: 6.21:1 > > Passed at Level AA for regular text, and pass at Level AAA for large text: > If the text is large text (at least 18 point or 14 point bold), the > luminosity contrast ratio is sufficient for the chosen colours at Level > AAA; otherwise, Level AA (#1B1814 and #999). > " > Results from > http://juicystudio.com/services/luminositycontrastratio.php > > but, you see, the text is 25% smaller than what is defined as normal text > size. > > >> 4) If an author wants to make multiple versions of a stylesheet for their >> website, for different colour schemes just as different designs (like the >> football club example given previously) why would we not make it easy for >> the author to do this? > > I am not against making it easy for authors to do alternate stylesheets. I > am very much against websites that do not do the basics and do not even > understand what basic color contrast and respect of the users' font-size > request. > >> Sure, authors can abuse it, but they can abuse >> everything they are given. We have to give them the option to be >> altruistic. > > > Alternate stylesheets for stylish presentations is okay with me. I > reviewed, corrected and improved the alternate stylesheets in the > "KazGarden-Project" > http://www.gimp-werkstatt.de/kaze/ > and provided my own alternate stylesheet (see Browser-bug stylesheet). > > > >> 5) Whenever there is a use case that is prolific in being hacked around, >> this is always a perfect opportunity for standardisation (seriously, when >> will I have to stop writing JS to get text-overflow:ellipsis; to work over >> multiple lines?). I see often websites with an option for different colour >> schemes for accessibility, but they use JS and cookies to implement their >> own opinion of what an alternate stylesheet should be. Standardising this >> behaviour ensures that it is easy for authors to implement these things if >> they want to, instead of coming up with the same bugs that everyone else >> already has, and the user gets a predictable and safe behaviour. > > I think how to notify users/visitors of alternate stylesheets available > for a webpage is up to UA developers. Chrome has an extension that seems > good in that regards. Older Firefox versions were using the status bar. > > Gérard > >> Thanks. >> >> AK >> >> On 15 Oct 2012, at 10:13, Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch> wrote: >> >>> Am 14.10.2012 03:59 schrieb "Gérard Talbot": >>>>> Let me give you an example. My favorite football club recently >>>>> redesigned their website. It's awful: http://www.fcz.ch - they seemed >>>>> to >>>>> try hard to make it look "hip hop" resp. "urban", as they expect this >>>>> to >>>>> be what the fans like. >>>> >>>> Most likely those football club fans are under 35-40 years old >>>> when/where >>>> they do not mind small (and/or frozen) font sizes. Also, often web >>>> designers are youngsters who do not have low vision and who prefer to >>>> have >>>> a lot of stuff filing webpages and lots of flash animated stuff, >>>> cosmetic >>>> effects, over-excessively driven by javascript, DHTML, etc. >>>> >>>>> I doubt that there was any chance for the web >>>>> designer to change the design towards more accessibility. But if (s)he >>>>> could have suggested one or two alternate style sheets that respect >>>>> accessibility needs, I am sure (s)he would have got the budget to >>>>> write >>>>> them. >>>> >>>> Markus, I respectfully still disagree with you. I do not want websites >>>> to >>>> create, develop, manage, tune alternate stylesheets in the name >>>> accessible >>>> font-size and suitable/reasonable color contrast for >>>> readability/legibility purposes. I want the normal default style sheets >>>> to >>>> be accessible, not to override users' font-size, etc. >>> >>> Well I agree with these points of yours. The crucial question in this >>> branch of the thread seems to be: Should the CSS spec be educational, >>> should it force authors towards what the spec authors consider good >>> design, and penalize bad design? Or is it ok also to offer good >>> workarounds for bad design? >>> >>> I personnally tend to the latter. You can't stop people from making bad >>> designs if they think what they create is "cool". But you could convince >>> some of them to provide a useful alternative for those who have problems >>> with that "cool" stuff. This is the background of my suggestion. >>> >> >> > > > -- > CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011 > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html > > Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite > http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/ > > Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite > http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html >
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 18:38:49 UTC