3 ms·

Zoom the website in, the browser has accessibility built in and hackernews zooms in fairly well. Edit: I seem to be missing something as this is getting downvo

by vasco 2y ago

Zoom the website in, the browser has accessibility built in and hackernews zooms in fairly well. Edit: I seem to be missing something as this is getting downvoted. I genuinely cannot use HN under 150% zoom so thought this was a basic comment I was making.

uoaei 2y ago
Accessibility isn't just about possibility, it's about ergonomics. You could integrate a differential equation by lining rocks up in a large desert as a computer, but you wouldn't say that solution is "accessible" to a human in the same way it would be with a CPU, a monitor, and functioning sight.
- vasco 2y ago
  Ah, so people are annoyed that the zoom isn't appropriate by default, I get it. Thanks I was getting extremely confused. That being said I use different zoom levels for different websites, and the browser remembers them for me, I like how the feature works right now, and I have loads of myopia. If people made it "big enough" to be inclusive by default in some websites I'd have to zoom out as well. So my point is that to me is more important to zoom in correctly (many websites don't), than be "big enough" to start with.
  - uoaei 2y ago
    I agree about zoom levels on different websites when on desktop. Zoom works differently on mobile vs desktop which is its own challenge as far as ergonomic use. On mobile, to get the up/downvote buttons to the size I want them, I'd have to scroll side-to-side to read comments.
  - Tijdreiziger 2y ago
    I mean, even at 175% zoom, the vote arrows are pretty close together on a touchscreen. And I’m barely 30. I always end up double-checking whether the ‘unvote’ link is present. If it says ‘undown’, I know I’ve made a mistake (or vice versa).
yreg 2y ago
> I seem to be missing something as this is getting downvoted. I wouldn't downvote you, but I think those who did have read your comment as saying that it (hn design) is fine and they disagree. (I'm not saying that's what you've said)

by vasco 2y ago

uoaei 2y ago

Accessibility isn't just about possibility, it's about ergonomics. You could integrate a differential equation by lining rocks up in a large desert as a computer, but you wouldn't say that solution is "accessible" to a human in the same way it would be with a CPU, a monitor, and functioning sight.

vasco 2y ago
Ah, so people are annoyed that the zoom isn't appropriate by default, I get it. Thanks I was getting extremely confused. That being said I use different zoom levels for different websites, and the browser remembers them for me, I like how the feature works right now, and I have loads of myopia. If people made it "big enough" to be inclusive by default in some websites I'd have to zoom out as well. So my point is that to me is more important to zoom in correctly (many websites don't), than be "big enough" to start with.
- uoaei 2y ago
  I agree about zoom levels on different websites when on desktop. Zoom works differently on mobile vs desktop which is its own challenge as far as ergonomic use. On mobile, to get the up/downvote buttons to the size I want them, I'd have to scroll side-to-side to read comments.
- Tijdreiziger 2y ago
  I mean, even at 175% zoom, the vote arrows are pretty close together on a touchscreen. And I’m barely 30. I always end up double-checking whether the ‘unvote’ link is present. If it says ‘undown’, I know I’ve made a mistake (or vice versa).

yreg 2y ago

> I seem to be missing something as this is getting downvoted. I wouldn't downvote you, but I think those who did have read your comment as saying that it (hn design) is fine and they disagree. (I'm not saying that's what you've said)