5 ms·

As compared with 139 contrast errors on this HN page as of 2021-01-12 19:04 GMT: https://wave.webaim.org/report#/https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25748442 h

• user5994461 6y ago
  The 139 contrast errors are all the headers "jshprentz" "12 minutes ago" not having enough contrast.
  • rectang 6y ago
    That "12 minutes ago" has insufficient contrast is still a valid critique from an accessibility standpoint, even if the design choice seems reasonable at first. There will be sight-impaired people who struggle to consume those "age" snippets, as opposed to perceiving them as legible but de-emphasized.
    • zdragnar 6y ago
      I don't think the point was that they didn't matter, but structurally, it is 2 errors repeated 70 times as opposed to 140 distinct errors- might even just be one if they are lumped together as "post label" rather than "name" and "time".
• thelean12 6y ago
  HN has always had horrible UX and no desire to fix it. This tracks and does not excuse the original site at all.
  • dxdm 6y ago
    > HN has always had horrible UX and no desire to fix it. I thought the other day that's their way of discouraging new users, thereby slowing down the local Eternal September. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September