2 ms·

1. Accommodating disabled people is in no way an insult. No, but treating non-disabled people as disabled could be. Just like offering help to some disabled pe

1. Accommodating disabled people is in no way an insult. No, but treating non-disabled people as disabled could be. Just like offering help to some disabled people triggers them. I was going to respond to these numbered points in turn, but that'd be silly. My point is that having basic (previously standard) UI cues like buttons is important and stuffing that option anywhere is a poor choice. To put it under the accessibility options can (if we're even a tiny bit snarky) be seen as an insult - possibly to disabled people as well since it lumps a simple standard usability thing in with stuff designed for people with actual challenges. It's also not cool for them to make critical UI cues an option when they also take away themes which are the ultimate option. Ultimately they have given no valid reason to make so many things look the same when they used to be visually (and functionally) distinct. Sorry for the trigger, I didn't mean any insult to anyone other than the UI designers.

eyelidlessness 5y ago
> No, but treating non-disabled people as disabled could be. Just like offering help to some disabled people triggers them. Putting this option in accessibility settings does no such thing. That assumption is what I take issue with, and what prompted all of my points above. > My point is that having basic (previously standard) UI cues like buttons is important and stuffing that option anywhere is a poor choice. I disagree. I often find designs with fewer borders and shapes easier to use—that is, more accessible to me—_because_ there’s less information for me to visually process to find what I’m looking for. That said, I’d be perfectly fine if they inverted the default… or even just asked on first install/startup, with a note on where you can change it later if you change your mind.

eyelidlessness 5y ago

> No, but treating non-disabled people as disabled could be. Just like offering help to some disabled people triggers them. Putting this option in accessibility settings does no such thing. That assumption is what I take issue with, and what prompted all of my points above. > My point is that having basic (previously standard) UI cues like buttons is important and stuffing that option anywhere is a poor choice. I disagree. I often find designs with fewer borders and shapes easier to use—that is, more accessible to me—_because_ there’s less information for me to visually process to find what I’m looking for. That said, I’d be perfectly fine if they inverted the default… or even just asked on first install/startup, with a note on where you can change it later if you change your mind.