News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by joblessjunkie on Thursday June 12, 2014 @09:43AM (#7883300)
I have poor vision.

This website uses a herd-to-read font and disables pinch-to-zoom (an essential feature) on my iPad.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by leorocky on Thursday June 12, 2014 @09:52AM (#7883363)
This website is even difficult to read on a regular desktop browser (too wide, downvoted comments increasingly impossible to read causing eye strain). I recommend using your own content script with Chrome. This may not help on your iPad but on Android you can use Firefox with your own userscript. It's the only way I can tolerate it.

It would probably take a competent someone a few hours to fix the readability issues of this site but they just never get around to it.

Edit:

Here's a link to what all comments look like for me, even if they're downvoted:

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/v5zcn9n4vg4m3cn/2014-06-1...

I also disabled scores and voting because I dislike that stuff.

This is the home page:

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/sicqor50smsl4hx/2014-06-1...

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by shutupalready on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:10AM (#7883476)
joblessjunkie means the original article's site.

Pinch-to-zoom works fine on HackerNews on an iPad, and the HackerNews font is nothing unusual.

Regarding HN being too wide, why don't you narrow your browser window?

Personally, I like the fact the traditional web design in which HN adjusts the line to screen width rather than imposing a width.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by claudius on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:19AM (#7883532)
Hm, I’d be happy with some max-width:50em or so on the actual text. Now if only Firefox had a built-in way to apply custom user stylesheets to websites…
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by pmontra on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:35AM (#7883623)
It's not built-in but the Stylish extension does that.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by sp332 on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:50AM (#7883697)
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by claudius on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:10PM (#7884228)
Sarcastic, yes, but mostly relating to Opera 12.x’s UserCSS features; I didn’t actually know about userContent.css. Thanks for the pointer, although it seems to be impossible to only apply it to certain sites?
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by sp332 on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:54PM (#7884506)
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by claudius on Thursday June 12, 2014 @02:20PM (#7885100)
Yay, thank you for the handholding, it actually seems to work quite nicely :-)
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by judk on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:34AM (#7883985)
Chrome however is deprecating this feature. Stylish will be required.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by krapp on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:40AM (#7883641)
greasemonkey can too, with the added benefit of being able to script the page as well.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by thefreeman on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:08PM (#7884209)
Personally, I like the fact the traditional web design in which HN adjusts the line to screen width rather than imposing a width.

Its just that it ruins the experience on mobile devices because you can't resize the window and zooming doesn't reflow the text.

for what it's worth, I don't really have a problem with it. They provide an API and there are like 90 billion ycombinator mobile apps to choose from which do a better job.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by mreiland on Thursday June 12, 2014 @06:12PM (#7886306)
ah, it's a mobile issue. I strictly use a desktop for HN and was confused about why people were complaining.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by Alupis on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:40AM (#7883644)
The Original article seems to mis-quote browser marketshare. They have IE10 listed as 3% of the market and "Other" as 36%? And all the IE's combined for 19% market share? Everything I've seen (except the original article) list the IE's at a combined market share somewhere in the neighborhood of 50-70%., with IE8 still having a dominant 15-20%.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by tendom on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:23AM (#7883896)
I'm not sure what the global numbers are at right now, but Microsoft and Google have roughly 30% each in America.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by wfjackson on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:33AM (#7883980)
See my other comment for the reason for discrepancy.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7883973

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by leorocky on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:19AM (#7883535)
> Regarding HN being too wide, why don't you narrow your browser window?

Narrow my browser window because this one site makes it difficult to read? I could do that, or I could just use a content script and leave my browser at the width I prefer. I maximize my browser for distraction free reading.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by mreiland on Thursday June 12, 2014 @06:11PM (#7886303)
Can you explain to me the issue with it being too wide?

I may not be understanding it, because I just maximized the window and I don't see any issue, really.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by EpicEng on Thursday June 12, 2014 @05:30PM (#7886071)
Eight,I'm sure I'm going to resize my browser just to read HN and then maximize it again when I navigate away to a site which uses a sane content width. No need to be an apologist. I like the content here,but the design in many respects,is awful (expired links anyone?).
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by mreiland on Thursday June 12, 2014 @06:09PM (#7886291)
I have no issues whatsoever with the width/layout issues, but the expires links... yes.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by joesmo on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:29AM (#7883592)
Oftentimes, narrowing HN below 1280px is still not enough as the content then scrolls sideways, so there is a very good argument for putting a width on content that doesn't adjust to the window size properly.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by judk on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:32AM (#7883975)
HN doesn't reflow/wrap text to window size on Android Chrome or Firefox. Only the pre-KitKat "Browser" works on HN.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by pbz on Thursday June 12, 2014 @01:00PM (#7884543)
Opera kept that feature, it works.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by andyroid on Thursday June 12, 2014 @02:51PM (#7885271)
I just downloaded Opera for Android because of this, but no, it does not work as the old android browser did. Or do I need to adjust a setting for this somewhere?
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by dbaupp on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:00AM (#7883412)
I don't think joblessjunkie was talking about HN.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by glitchdout on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:09PM (#7884215)
On my desktop browser, I can only browse Hacker News with zoom at 150%.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by Aardwolf on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:18AM (#7883523)
Just select the text of a downvoted comment to have readable colors
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by pjc50 on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:22AM (#7883551)
HN is tiny and unreadable in default Android chrome.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by DanBC on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:43AM (#7883659)
Hard to read downvoted comments is a feature not a usability bug.

Down voted comments are supposed to be hard for everyone to read.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by alistairSH on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:54AM (#7883723)
I don't think a screen reader would pick up the down-voted comments as different from other comments. So, it's still broken from an accessibility standpoint.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by dspeyer on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:28PM (#7884339)
Aural style sheets? Do they work?
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by Isofarro on Thursday June 12, 2014 @02:47PM (#7885252)
I think Emacspeak was the only screen reader that supported even just a limited subset of aural styles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacspeak

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by wfjackson on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:32AM (#7883973)
Not just that but it's abusing statistics.

StatCounter attempts to measure browsing volume, not people using a particular browser.

Net Applications attempts to measure people using a browser, so IE9's reported share is three times higher, around 9%.

As an analogy, take the toothpaste market with only two players. Lets say 30% of people use Colgate and 70% use Crest. But for some reason the first group uses more toothpaste, so 60% of toothpaste sold in the market is Colgate and 40% is Crest.

Now, which one has a higher "marketshare"? Crest or Colgate?

It's funny how everyone gets so confused about this.

Anyway, Net Applications is the more apt comparison here because she's attempting to compare people having a disability, not the amount of browsing done by such people.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by bunderbunder on Thursday June 12, 2014 @01:08PM (#7884601)
> Now, which one has a higher "marketshare"? Crest or Colgate?

Trick question.

I can't answer that question until I've decided whether I want to be a Crest fan or a Colgate fan. Sort of like how I can't decide whether to measure smartphone market size by units shipped or dollars spent without first deciding whether I want to promote Android or iOS.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by ntietz on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:54PM (#7884510)
I think that in this case, it's fair to compare the number of people who have a disability instead of the amount of browsing they do, because it speaks to the potential market.

Suppose that there was no technology to help blind people use computers. Then blind people would have 0% of browsing, but they're not 0% of the population -- should we create technology to help them even though they do no browsing? (Yes.)

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by lilsunnybee on Thursday June 12, 2014 @01:52PM (#7884936)
Regardless of if IE9 use is 3% or 9%, the point still stands. It's still an at least higher or comparable number of internet users that are ignored and marginalized by the workflows and decision-making of most internet app projects.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by joev_ on Thursday June 12, 2014 @09:56AM (#7883381)
To be fair, there is a large disclaimer:

> I'd like to start this post with a disclaimer: I don't know much about creating accessible websites.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by fionatg on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:02AM (#7883428)
Exactly, it sort of re-inforces my point that when I was designing that site I didn't really think about it. I don't have to be an accessibility expert to discuss the fact that developers don't tend to create accessible sites!
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by lilsunnybee on Thursday June 12, 2014 @02:17PM (#7885085)
I really liked the first font from a design standpoint and found it quite readable! It's ridiculous you're being attacked for voicing a very valid concern on your own blog, because of your preferred font choice. A lot of the comments both on your blog and on here seem to almost be mocking the idea that sites should be accessible, by making an unwarranted personal attack against you, when you clearly state you were never even introduced to accessibility programming through formal education, like lots and lots of developers weren't ( myself included ).

Forcing programmers to jump through extra hoops (trying /em to learn on their own, and making well-intentioned changes but not knowing if its right or enough or effective) is not the way to increase knowledge and uptake of accessibility-minded-design as the standard.

It would be nice if designers were still able to make stylistic choices with regards to fonts and website colors, that may be less readable for some, but have it degrade easily to something more readable with a simple command or click of a button. Besides some roundabout ways i can think of, or using readability, im not sure how to do that easily though.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by steven2012 on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:19AM (#7883862)
It doesn't reinforce your point, it makes you look like a hypocrite.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by tombrossman on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:38AM (#7884008)
That's an unfair criticism. The author (and I, and the rest of us) are not focussing our efforts logically. We can see browser stats in server logs, but measuring disabled or impaired visitors' traffic is easy to overlook - servers don't collect this data point.

She's now raised the issue for a wider audience and this could only be hypocrisy if she held herself up as an example of how to do things correctly. She isn't, and says so right at the top of the article.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by daktanis on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:14PM (#7884256)
Starting a conversation on your blog about a topic you don't know much about doesn't make you a hypocrite.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by judk on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:35AM (#7883994)
It is an admission of the problem and a plea for help.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by moistgorilla on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:28PM (#7884337)
Do you even know what that word means?
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by martin-adams on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:03AM (#7883432)
You'll be pleased to know that the website works absolutely fine in IE9
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by wooptoo on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:05AM (#7883445)
Here you go https://www.readability.com/articles/8jmyuikb

The article has horrible fonts.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by coldpie on Thursday June 12, 2014 @01:11PM (#7884617)
As with most JS-heavy websites, NoScript improves its readability. In this case, there are no shitty fonts.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by sugarfactory on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:16AM (#7883513)
I use this bookmarklet (taken from Stack Exchange [0]) on webpages that disable pinch-to-zoom to re-enable it on iOS devices. Some pages crash Safari after using it and zooming for unknown reasons.

    javascript:document.querySelector('meta[name=viewport]').setAttribute('content','width=200,initial-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=10.0,user-scalable=1');
[0]: http://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/28391/how-can-i-for...
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by hluska on Thursday June 12, 2014 @09:55AM (#7883377)
I completely agree.

I wouldn't consider this an impairment, but my eyesight is changing (it is getting harder for me to work on a screen when I'm wearing glasses). This font is very hard to read!!

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by jessaustin on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:14AM (#7883507)
She did say "we".
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by jdstafford on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:08AM (#7883463)
I had a similar difficulty with reading the font. I opened the site in lynx and was surprised to discover that it was relatively well structured (easy to read/navigate).
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by user24 on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:48PM (#7884466)
I agree, but the tu-quoque is not really helpful here.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by zuck9 on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:41AM (#7884042)
It has been changed on popular "HN" demand.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by leeoniya on Thursday June 12, 2014 @10:25AM (#7883576)
the irony is palpable
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by justinsteele on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:27AM (#7883925)
Did you read the article? There is no irony here, she immediately points out her lack of understanding of fundamental accessibility principles. That is why she wrote about how we as an industry allow that to happen (senior engineers who know nothing about catering to disability).
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by leeoniya on Thursday June 12, 2014 @11:49AM (#7884086)
sure there is. it's like an investigative journalist learning nothing (or failing to apply lessons learned) about good investigative journalism while writing about it.

another comparison would be like a professional driver admitting he knows nothing about hand brakes, writing an essay about why he knows nothing about them, how he can learn and be more knowledgeable about them...and then proceeding to drive 1,000 miles with the hand brake engaged.

i wouldn't expect her to learn or apply all of WAI-ARIA, but you'd think after doing so much research on the subject, she could change a simple font-family tag to help her case.

Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by daktanis on Thursday June 12, 2014 @12:17PM (#7884273)
Personal blog, slow your roll. Author said they were a professional software developer, not a professional writer.
Re:3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cate... by lilsunnybee on Thursday June 12, 2014 @02:27PM (#7885142)
And she was more pointing out how most developers are not ever taught or required to make their projects accessible (at least by company standards if not legally)