4 ms·

The most annoying thing for me, as a vision-impaired user, is that AMP pages disable zoom. I know that can be overridden in Chrome's accessibility settings, bu

The most annoying thing for me, as a vision-impaired user, is that AMP pages disable zoom. I know that can be overridden in Chrome's accessibility settings, but it's a shitty practice that something like AMP shouldn't be promoting.

rpmisms 7y ago
I think the idea is that you'll either use a screen reader or use the system zoom tool. Not defending it, but I can see the logic they used.
- squiggleblaz 7y ago
  But what's wrong with using the web browser's zoom tool? Why is it somehow worse to get reflowing zoom? This idea that I'm using a phone optimised site so all text should be 8pt is just bizarre. It's not like the UA author has removed support for zoom: they're just disabling it arbitrarily.
  - Fr0styMatt88 7y ago
    It's not even about reflowing text, it's just the usual two-finger zoom gesture that gets disabled. I'm very accustomed to moving the large text as I read it, so don't even need reflow.
- Fr0styMatt88 7y ago
  I'll use the system zoom if I need to, but it's very awkward compared to the browser zoom. You're stuck panning around the magnified screen with one set of gestures, while also having to scroll through the page using the browser's gestures. It works but it's not pleasant. The excuse I always hear about disabling zoom has to do with the multi-touch delay. I can somewhat see the sense of that for very particular applications, but definitely not for AMP, which as I understand it is meant for mostly static content (I'm only assuming though). More often than not, what I find is that if I override zoom disable and then browser zoom on a site that doesn't allow it usually, it ends up breaking the layout as you zoom. This makes me wonder if they're just disabling zoom because they can't be bothered fixing their CSS to deal with it.

4 ms·

The most annoying thing for me, as a vision-impaired user, is that AMP pages disable zoom. I know that can be overridden in Chrome's accessibility settings, bu

by Fr0styMatt88 7y ago

rpmisms 7y ago
I think the idea is that you'll either use a screen reader or use the system zoom tool. Not defending it, but I can see the logic they used.
- squiggleblaz 7y ago
  But what's wrong with using the web browser's zoom tool? Why is it somehow worse to get reflowing zoom? This idea that I'm using a phone optimised site so all text should be 8pt is just bizarre. It's not like the UA author has removed support for zoom: they're just disabling it arbitrarily.
  - Fr0styMatt88 7y ago
    It's not even about reflowing text, it's just the usual two-finger zoom gesture that gets disabled. I'm very accustomed to moving the large text as I read it, so don't even need reflow.
- Fr0styMatt88 7y ago
  I'll use the system zoom if I need to, but it's very awkward compared to the browser zoom. You're stuck panning around the magnified screen with one set of gestures, while also having to scroll through the page using the browser's gestures. It works but it's not pleasant. The excuse I always hear about disabling zoom has to do with the multi-touch delay. I can somewhat see the sense of that for very particular applications, but definitely not for AMP, which as I understand it is meant for mostly static content (I'm only assuming though). More often than not, what I find is that if I override zoom disable and then browser zoom on a site that doesn't allow it usually, it ends up breaking the layout as you zoom. This makes me wonder if they're just disabling zoom because they can't be bothered fixing their CSS to deal with it.