4 ms·

Preface: I am autistic, and live in a non-autistic world. Yes, I want to be taken into account, but not by default. It can really hurt if you cannot be taken in

by Fnoord 4y ago

Preface: I am autistic, and live in a non-autistic world. Yes, I want to be taken into account, but not by default. It can really hurt if you cannot be taken into account though. I believe a color scheme or font should not, by default, take into account color blindness or dyslexia. I mean, we could do that, but the reward would be too low compared to the cost because the amount of people with such disability is too low compared to healthy amount. Instead, users should have the option to opt for a colorblind or dyslexia color scheme or font, just like there's lifts in public space but also stairs, and its assumed most users can use the stairs (else you'd get congestion). The only exception is things like traffic signs. But given HN is an American website, I believe the US is putting emphasis on written text on traffic signs where symbols (picture language) would suffice, and improve on the matter (not just because not all speak English but more because of reading taking more effort than observing a sign, leading to errors).

hnbad 4y ago
I too am autistic. I don't see how that's relevant or an appropriate comparison though. Most specifically "colorblind-friendly" color schemes suck. Most "regular" color schemes are at least partially accessible to colorblindness though. My complaint is that the author claimed the changes "preserve accessibility" while objectively making the theme less accessible. If the colors are indistinguishable in greyscale, that is not a good thing. Heck, there's not even one true way to determine what the "greyscale equivalent" of a given color is. The author's initial complaint was that Solarized doesn't have enough light-dark contrast between the text and the background and took a stab at solving this after reading a little bit about color theory. Don't get me wrong, this is an interesting hack (which makes this relevant for HN) but my concern is with the author making misleading accessibility claims and calling it an "optimized" or "improved" theme (to the point that others have commented they are downloading and using it themselves) while clearly demonstrating a lack of understanding of accessibility and admitting to having a very limited knowledge of "color theory". Specifically, there was no need to homogenize the colors like this in order to increase the light-dark contrast of the theme. Even from a design aspect alone it made the theme blander, less interesting. The author lacks the knowledge to understand what makes the theme work, so how can they claim they have improved upon it? Again, it's an interesting hack and a fun creative exercise and the result may even serve the author's and others' needs. But neither did it "preserve accessibility", nor did it "improve" nor "optimize" the theme. Your argument seems to be that restricting color palettes to make them more accessible by default limits creative choices, but my point is that arbitrarily pinning the lightness as an amateur attempt at improving light-dark contrast has this exact same effect (i.e. making the result less interesting) while additionally making the result less accessible.
- zacharyvoase 4y ago
  Could you post a link to the color scheme that you made?

by Fnoord 4y ago

hnbad 4y ago

I too am autistic. I don't see how that's relevant or an appropriate comparison though. Most specifically "colorblind-friendly" color schemes suck. Most "regular" color schemes are at least partially accessible to colorblindness though. My complaint is that the author claimed the changes "preserve accessibility" while objectively making the theme less accessible. If the colors are indistinguishable in greyscale, that is not a good thing. Heck, there's not even one true way to determine what the "greyscale equivalent" of a given color is. The author's initial complaint was that Solarized doesn't have enough light-dark contrast between the text and the background and took a stab at solving this after reading a little bit about color theory. Don't get me wrong, this is an interesting hack (which makes this relevant for HN) but my concern is with the author making misleading accessibility claims and calling it an "optimized" or "improved" theme (to the point that others have commented they are downloading and using it themselves) while clearly demonstrating a lack of understanding of accessibility and admitting to having a very limited knowledge of "color theory". Specifically, there was no need to homogenize the colors like this in order to increase the light-dark contrast of the theme. Even from a design aspect alone it made the theme blander, less interesting. The author lacks the knowledge to understand what makes the theme work, so how can they claim they have improved upon it? Again, it's an interesting hack and a fun creative exercise and the result may even serve the author's and others' needs. But neither did it "preserve accessibility", nor did it "improve" nor "optimize" the theme. Your argument seems to be that restricting color palettes to make them more accessible by default limits creative choices, but my point is that arbitrarily pinning the lightness as an amateur attempt at improving light-dark contrast has this exact same effect (i.e. making the result less interesting) while additionally making the result less accessible.

zacharyvoase 4y ago
Could you post a link to the color scheme that you made?