| 1 | | Replying to [comment:36 helen]: |
| 2 | | > Replying to [comment:35 usability.idealist]: |
| 3 | | > > But you know, some folks might find it not "visually appealing" (aka artsy) enuff :-/ |
| 4 | | > |
| 5 | | > This is my kind request we not make derogatory comments about other disciplines or people, no |
| 6 | | > matter how covert. |
| 7 | | |
| 8 | | From my POV, the horrible contrast disaster in the default admin menu '''IS''' a cause of going all out for "visual appealing". Ie. utter graphic design aspects over usability. |
| 9 | | And it '''IS''' a wide-spread approach. Maybe mislead because of lacking education, but as long as nobody complains and says something against it, including constructive critique, NOTHING will change. |
| 10 | | |
| 11 | | Middle blue on a grayish background is mediocre readable, even for "non-handicapped" persons. The blue color clearly derives from the overall color scheme (mostly the buttons), but could have been easily improved by using #030303 as background hover / focus color and cranking the color intensity (gcolor2 calls it "Value") up to 100%. It'd still not be as good as using the straight white-black contrast, but a step in the right direction. And would still have been uniform, out of one cast, with the rest of the scheme styles. |
| 12 | | |
| 13 | | But: Didn't happen. So of corpse my speculation would be - mere visual appeal and continuity over usability and accessibility. Or a simple ignorance of these (in the original meaning of the word; lt. ignorare - to not know, to be not acquainted with). |
| 14 | | |
| 15 | | cu, w0lf. |
| | 1 | - |