News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Firefox 36.0 released by willlma on Tuesday February 24, 2015 @09:38PM (#9104961)
Re:Firefox 36.0 released by Curmudgel on Tuesday February 24, 2015 @10:04PM (#9105038)
That is poor advice which doesn't account for the difference between computer screens and ink on paper. The deepest black you can get on a monitor will not be as dark as certain inks on a page.
Re:Firefox 36.0 released by chipotle_coyote on Tuesday February 24, 2015 @10:33PM (#9105132)
I'd argue that it does account for that difference, just not in an immediately obvious way. Screen displays are an additive color model and print is a subtractive one; screens shine light at you, paper has light shined on it. This makes for a very different perceptual feel; (completely) black ink on white paper is way less "contrasty" than #000 text on an #FFF background. WCAG accessibility guidelines suggest a minimum contrast ratio of 7:1 luminosity -- #000 on #FFF is a 21:1 contrast ratio!

In practice, I think we'd be better off darkening the background a little and lightening the foreground just a touch; #333 text on #F8F8F8 background still "feels" like black and white, but (assuming you've chosen a reasonable text size) it'll be a lot easier to read if you're dealing with long-form text.

Re:Firefox 36.0 released by sjwright on Tuesday February 24, 2015 @10:46PM (#9105181)
I find it difficult to believe that the relative difference between #F8F8F8 and #FFFFFF matters at all relative to the the widely varying screen brightness settings on everyone's very different computers, tablets and phones in very different lighting conditions.
Re:Firefox 36.0 released by qnaal on Wednesday February 25, 2015 @12:13AM (#9105408)
It's (generally) bad 'design' to fill areas with black, sure- but #000 outlines and text is just getting proper use of the limited dynamic range we're provided with.