Marty DeAngelo > > I agree - I think that the 'high-contrast version' is actually MUCH harder to read than the original version. Not only is 'black-on-white' thought to be one of the optimum styles for reading (so, 'high-contrast' seems a misnomer) but studies have shown that a variation of light gray is easiest to read on a black background.
Hi Marty There's a difference between what studies show, and what individuals need. Most people with visual impairments do in fact read to some extent, and prefer to read if they can. Their requirements for reading may be very different from the rest of us. For example, some people can read more easily with white-on-black than the other way around. An example: I worked with a colleague who was both colour-blind and suffered from migraines. He chose a colour scheme for his desktop that I found quite sick-making, but was comfortable for him. The ideal is to provide a 'display options' that allows the knowledgeable user to tune up the CSS to their own requirements. For example, try www.bbc.co.uk which has 'Display Options' in the top left corner - or go directly to http://www.bbc.co.uk/displayoptions/index.shtml?url=www.bbc.co.uk/ I'm still struggling with how to provide displays that are easily tuned for the less knowledgeable user who doesn't spot the 'display options' link. But maybe people will get used to looking for it. Having said all that, it's still possible to come up with downright ugly and unusable versions ... a typical mistake is failing to adjust the button/menu text at the same time as everything else. Best Caroline Jarrett (which reminds me: I must put a bit of stuff about this on www.designtoread.com) ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
