3 ms·

I found it perfectly readable and checked with Firefox' accessibility tools: The contrast of the main text is a 12.19 and thus meets the WCAG AAA standards for

I found it perfectly readable and checked with Firefox' accessibility tools: The contrast of the main text is a 12.19 and thus meets the WCAG AAA standards for accessible text. [1] is the documentation Firefox links to. [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Accessibility/Understanding_WCAG/Perceivable/Color_contrast https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Accessibility/U...

D13Fd 6y ago
I find this response hilarious, because you jumped to a standard to make your argument without considering that what you are seeing may not match what others are seeing. The page is super hard to read with the white background it has in Firefox, but fine with the dark background it has in Chrome. I.e., the problem is that the website sometimes renders with a white background and very light pink text.
- derefr 6y ago
  > the dark background it has in Chrome ...eh? https://i.imgur.com/Qwn7A4f.png https://i.imgur.com/Qwn7A4f.png
  - D13Fd 6y ago
    Maybe it's random? I get the dark in Chrome and white in Firefox.
anamexis 6y ago
Just because you find it readable does not mean others can; also, color contrast is not the only thing that affects readability. In this case, the issue is font weight. Here's some discussion on the issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/665 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/665
n0w 6y ago
The page has a different (lighter) text colour for dark mode but the background colour doesn't change on dark mode, making it nearly unreadable. The Firefox tools tell me it has a contrast of 1.43
- feifan 6y ago
  Yep, that's it. Turns out, Safari/Chrome change the page background automatically based on your OS setting. FF seems not to.
mplewis 6y ago
Oh, word? Mine's at 1.43. https://imgur.com/a/AVQxh20 https://imgur.com/a/AVQxh20
eyelidlessness 6y ago
This is why metrics versus real world measurement are at odds. Sure, measure the luminance all you want; sure ignore the fact that color spaces and visual impairment aren't evenly distributed. But don't tell someone they can see something they can't.
- TimWolla 6y ago
  I was not telling anyone that they must be able to see this properly. I was saying that I was able to see this properly and I was saying that according to an established standard it should be as readable as it gets. Sure, the standard might be lacking, but then the standard should be fixed. As a website author you need something to refer to when you don't experience these issues yourself.
  - eyelidlessness 6y ago
    > Sure, the standard might be lacking, but then the standard should be fixed. As a website author you need something to refer to when you don't experience these issues yourself. The problem is that it’s the wrong standard that’s lacking. WCAG does the best it can with the web specs, but it can’t just impose a perceptual color space on HTML/CSS, and it would be impossible for mere mortals to evaluate a perceptual contrast standard on RGB/HSL. But you can easily find A11y articles pointing out where the contrast ratios which pass or fail are very flawed for even people with good vision.
jspash 6y ago
Contrast isn't the only indicator of readability. The font choice here is IMHO terrible for screen. It's much too thin. Taking this to the logical extreme - just for fun - imagine a the perfect contrast score of Vantablack™ on Spectralon white. It wouldn't matter if the typeface stroke widths were only a micron wide. It would still be unreadable.

D13Fd 6y ago

I find this response hilarious, because you jumped to a standard to make your argument without considering that what you are seeing may not match what others are seeing. The page is super hard to read with the white background it has in Firefox, but fine with the dark background it has in Chrome. I.e., the problem is that the website sometimes renders with a white background and very light pink text.

derefr 6y ago
> the dark background it has in Chrome ...eh? https://i.imgur.com/Qwn7A4f.png https://i.imgur.com/Qwn7A4f.png
- D13Fd 6y ago
  Maybe it's random? I get the dark in Chrome and white in Firefox.

anamexis 6y ago

Just because you find it readable does not mean others can; also, color contrast is not the only thing that affects readability. In this case, the issue is font weight. Here's some discussion on the issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/665 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/665

n0w 6y ago

The page has a different (lighter) text colour for dark mode but the background colour doesn't change on dark mode, making it nearly unreadable. The Firefox tools tell me it has a contrast of 1.43

feifan 6y ago
Yep, that's it. Turns out, Safari/Chrome change the page background automatically based on your OS setting. FF seems not to.

mplewis 6y ago

Oh, word? Mine's at 1.43. https://imgur.com/a/AVQxh20 https://imgur.com/a/AVQxh20

eyelidlessness 6y ago

This is why metrics versus real world measurement are at odds. Sure, measure the luminance all you want; sure ignore the fact that color spaces and visual impairment aren't evenly distributed. But don't tell someone they can see something they can't.

TimWolla 6y ago
I was not telling anyone that they must be able to see this properly. I was saying that I was able to see this properly and I was saying that according to an established standard it should be as readable as it gets. Sure, the standard might be lacking, but then the standard should be fixed. As a website author you need something to refer to when you don't experience these issues yourself.
- eyelidlessness 6y ago
  > Sure, the standard might be lacking, but then the standard should be fixed. As a website author you need something to refer to when you don't experience these issues yourself. The problem is that it’s the wrong standard that’s lacking. WCAG does the best it can with the web specs, but it can’t just impose a perceptual color space on HTML/CSS, and it would be impossible for mere mortals to evaluate a perceptual contrast standard on RGB/HSL. But you can easily find A11y articles pointing out where the contrast ratios which pass or fail are very flawed for even people with good vision.

jspash 6y ago

Contrast isn't the only indicator of readability. The font choice here is IMHO terrible for screen. It's much too thin. Taking this to the logical extreme - just for fun - imagine a the perfect contrast score of Vantablack™ on Spectralon white. It wouldn't matter if the typeface stroke widths were only a micron wide. It would still be unreadable.