5 ms·

Unfortunately, this palette does not pass WCAG[1], which seems a weird thing to not have tested for if you've made a palette intended for web UI. If you own/ma

Unfortunately, this palette does not pass WCAG[1], which seems a weird thing to not have tested for if you've made a palette intended for web UI. If you own/manage this project: install the Axe browser extension[2], run it on your site, go "...oh...oh no..." and then unfortunately, take accessibility seriously and get to revising =/ [1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/ https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/ [2] https://www.deque.com/axe/browser-extensions/ https://www.deque.com/axe/browser-extensions/

fisf 4y ago
Except it's intended as a colour palette for code in ides, terminals, etc. So, wether it meets guidelines for web uis is completely irrelevant.
- andsoitis 4y ago
  The first paragraph on their site (emphasis mine): "Created for the clean and uncluttered design pattern to achieve a optimal focus and readability for code syntax highlighting and UI components."
  - fisf 4y ago
    Yes. And while many desktop applications will use web technologies, and all of them will use some kind of UI components, this still has nothing to do with WCAG (which is a guideline for webpages and web applications).
- ddoolin 4y ago
  https://www.nordtheme.com/docs/usage https://www.nordtheme.com/docs/usage There's a whole section dedicated to installing it in UI applications.
  - fisf 4y ago
    Yes. And WCAG applies to webpages.
- ehutch79 4y ago
  It's still an issue. I tried it again in VSCode today and was having a hard time with readability, and I don't even have any vision impairment issues.
Test0129 4y ago
> Unfortunately, this palette does not pass WCAG[1], which seems a weird thing to not have tested for if you've made a palette intended for web UI. ...can't you just use an accessibility extension to change the color scheme of a website? This seems like a solved problem. Extensions have been able to swap CSS for ages now.
- connordoner 4y ago
  Or you as a developer could just avoid alienating disabled people, who likely represent a large proportion of your target audience - whether you realise it or not?
  - csande17 4y ago
    In my experience, the only people actually alienated by a failure to strictly comply with WCAG's assumptions about color contrast are the ones who run random websites through automated scanners and complain about the results. WCAG's rules allow some color combinations that are inaccessible (eg black text on a red background, which is not visible to people with protanopia) and disallow some color combinations that are fine. You really need to have actual humans with disabilities look at your website to find out if it works for them.
  - Test0129 4y ago
    Or, I could be a developer burdened by developing, marketing, and promoting my product. Unable to afford the time nor the energy to dedicate a large portion of my already limited budget on such things. Fundamentally, you are correct. Practically, you are very wrong. If you've ever been in this situation, as I have, you simply do the best you can with the tools you have. Sometimes this means not doing anything at all. Is this correct? Probably not. However, no one is paying me to do it and if someone threatens to sue me over it I'll pull the code and release it under an anonymous pseudonym. At some point automated scanners that look for things like this and send mean emails about compliance, legal action, etc are just bullying not different from patent vultures. Heading down this path, while valiant, must be done carefully. Otherwise, Google/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon etc will be the only people with the budget to allow for full compliance to every possible disability that may effect the use of their product. I'm not convinced you understand just how much time and energy it takes out of actually delivering a product on a limited budget (in Nord's case free). Your use of "alienate" has venom behind it that makes me think you're implying they do this deliberately to spite people with disabilities. Occam's razor.
csande17 4y ago
What pairs of colors are you concerned about? I would expect a color palette website to produce a bunch of issues when run through an automated accessibility checker, since Grey 3 is never going to have sufficient contrast with the Grey 4 displayed next to it on the site. But in practice, like when placing a dark text color on a light background, it looks like the colors on the site can generally be used in a WCAG-compliant way.
efsavage 4y ago
We require ramps on buildings, but we don't ban stairs. Accessibility is very important, and you wouldn't want to use a palette like this as a default theme, but that doesn't mean everything has to pass every test. Many apps allow people to change themes and there's nothing wrong with offering a less-accessible one.
forbiddenvoid 4y ago
I see nothing on this site that indicates this theme is intended to be used for public websites (excepting the one on which it is demonstrated). Quite the opposite, actually. Reading the copy it seems pretty clear that this is intended to be used for personal tool theming - changing the color scheme for YOUR editor, terminal, etc. Personal theming (how a user themes their own tools) has no accessibility requirements. At most, this site probably should include a warning that this theme may not be suitable for some users and should be avoided if your visual needs require more contrast than the theme provides. If they attempted to extend this to be used for public sites, then yes, it's not fit for that purpose.
AtNightWeCode 4y ago
"Did not pass?" Well, but that is rather obvious. The palette is complete garbage. Why did anybody up-vote this post?
- DandyDev 4y ago
  Off topic, but can we please be civil and stop with the strong language? How about: "I personally don't like the palette"
  - AtNightWeCode 4y ago
    This palette will fail any automatic palette test. It is not just my personal opinion.
realgeniushere 4y ago
Don’t you have something better to do than attacking color palettes? Like suing people for having the power outlets an inch too high or something?

fisf 4y ago

Except it's intended as a colour palette for code in ides, terminals, etc. So, wether it meets guidelines for web uis is completely irrelevant.

andsoitis 4y ago
The first paragraph on their site (emphasis mine): "Created for the clean and uncluttered design pattern to achieve a optimal focus and readability for code syntax highlighting and UI components."
- fisf 4y ago
  Yes. And while many desktop applications will use web technologies, and all of them will use some kind of UI components, this still has nothing to do with WCAG (which is a guideline for webpages and web applications).
ddoolin 4y ago
https://www.nordtheme.com/docs/usage https://www.nordtheme.com/docs/usage There's a whole section dedicated to installing it in UI applications.
- fisf 4y ago
  Yes. And WCAG applies to webpages.
ehutch79 4y ago
It's still an issue. I tried it again in VSCode today and was having a hard time with readability, and I don't even have any vision impairment issues.

Test0129 4y ago

> Unfortunately, this palette does not pass WCAG[1], which seems a weird thing to not have tested for if you've made a palette intended for web UI. ...can't you just use an accessibility extension to change the color scheme of a website? This seems like a solved problem. Extensions have been able to swap CSS for ages now.

connordoner 4y ago
Or you as a developer could just avoid alienating disabled people, who likely represent a large proportion of your target audience - whether you realise it or not?
- csande17 4y ago
  In my experience, the only people actually alienated by a failure to strictly comply with WCAG's assumptions about color contrast are the ones who run random websites through automated scanners and complain about the results. WCAG's rules allow some color combinations that are inaccessible (eg black text on a red background, which is not visible to people with protanopia) and disallow some color combinations that are fine. You really need to have actual humans with disabilities look at your website to find out if it works for them.
- Test0129 4y ago
  Or, I could be a developer burdened by developing, marketing, and promoting my product. Unable to afford the time nor the energy to dedicate a large portion of my already limited budget on such things. Fundamentally, you are correct. Practically, you are very wrong. If you've ever been in this situation, as I have, you simply do the best you can with the tools you have. Sometimes this means not doing anything at all. Is this correct? Probably not. However, no one is paying me to do it and if someone threatens to sue me over it I'll pull the code and release it under an anonymous pseudonym. At some point automated scanners that look for things like this and send mean emails about compliance, legal action, etc are just bullying not different from patent vultures. Heading down this path, while valiant, must be done carefully. Otherwise, Google/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon etc will be the only people with the budget to allow for full compliance to every possible disability that may effect the use of their product. I'm not convinced you understand just how much time and energy it takes out of actually delivering a product on a limited budget (in Nord's case free). Your use of "alienate" has venom behind it that makes me think you're implying they do this deliberately to spite people with disabilities. Occam's razor.

csande17 4y ago

What pairs of colors are you concerned about? I would expect a color palette website to produce a bunch of issues when run through an automated accessibility checker, since Grey 3 is never going to have sufficient contrast with the Grey 4 displayed next to it on the site. But in practice, like when placing a dark text color on a light background, it looks like the colors on the site can generally be used in a WCAG-compliant way.

efsavage 4y ago

We require ramps on buildings, but we don't ban stairs. Accessibility is very important, and you wouldn't want to use a palette like this as a default theme, but that doesn't mean everything has to pass every test. Many apps allow people to change themes and there's nothing wrong with offering a less-accessible one.

forbiddenvoid 4y ago

I see nothing on this site that indicates this theme is intended to be used for public websites (excepting the one on which it is demonstrated). Quite the opposite, actually. Reading the copy it seems pretty clear that this is intended to be used for personal tool theming - changing the color scheme for YOUR editor, terminal, etc. Personal theming (how a user themes their own tools) has no accessibility requirements. At most, this site probably should include a warning that this theme may not be suitable for some users and should be avoided if your visual needs require more contrast than the theme provides. If they attempted to extend this to be used for public sites, then yes, it's not fit for that purpose.

AtNightWeCode 4y ago

"Did not pass?" Well, but that is rather obvious. The palette is complete garbage. Why did anybody up-vote this post?

DandyDev 4y ago
Off topic, but can we please be civil and stop with the strong language? How about: "I personally don't like the palette"
- AtNightWeCode 4y ago
  This palette will fail any automatic palette test. It is not just my personal opinion.

realgeniushere 4y ago

Don’t you have something better to do than attacking color palettes? Like suing people for having the power outlets an inch too high or something?