42 comments

[ 747 ms ] story [ 3441 ms ] thread
Ironic that the text is too small to read on my phone, and reader mode is not enabled. Do you have to do something specific to enable, or disable, reader mode?
You actually can't; it is purely heuristic, and (afaik intentionally) has no API facing page scripts or content. It just examines page content and, if it finds "enough" text, offers reader mode.

Here's how Firefox's reader mode implementation does it: https://github.com/mozilla/readability/blob/master/Readabili...

Oh jeez no wonder an extension to default to reader mode hasn't been the panacea I'd been hoping. The stupid extension doesn't have a bar icon to let me turn it off, instead I have to add to a whitelist.

Back to the drawing board.

You could probably do worse than to build your own extension that just wraps readability.js - the API isn't complicated, it just takes a document object and gives back an element tree you can use to replace the page body content. That'd let you control when and how it gets used, and also tune the heuristics to taste, neither of which is really available even to extensions with the browser's built-in reader mode.

It feels pretty gross to duplicate native functionality, sure. But it probably beats waiting for browsers to start exposing those APIs; they don't do that for a reason, and that reason seems unlikely to change very soon.

I recently tried to overcome some unexpected reader mode behavior on my site, and found it very difficult to find good, consistent, thorough documentation. It’s pretty opaque and can change without warning, and unlike most browser technology intentionally so (because documenting it makes it easy for ads and other junk to cheat). That said, I found one article[1] much more helpful than most of the other resources I found, linking here so it might help others.

1: https://medium.com/@mandy.michael/building-websites-for-safa...

Safari on iOS does NOT like this page. I was pretty excited to look at some low-contrast examples to mock in that top slider graphic, but the dang page keeps auto-scrolling me past it. Glass houses and all that...
You must go to the Scrolling Autonomy Rebellion site for that. Unfortunately it is very low contrast.
In the spirit of people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones: this website sucks to read on a phone.
(comment deleted)
I honestly find this page difficult to look at and read. It may be high contrast but that yellow is really hard on my eyes and does not make me excited to spend a long time on the site.
Same, it was incredibly difficult to focus on the text on this page for me. And I don't have any problems with my eyes. On top of that it kept switching from dark on light, to light on dark, making it even worse.
That one felt a bit contrived since it's highlighting an comment that has been downvoted almost to oblivion. The low contrast is a warning that the content is probably not worth your time. The low contrast is a feature, not a bug.
No, it's the initial submission, not a comment.

This also confuses the hell out of me, I always "read" them as "heavily downvoted comment" only to realize "hey, no, that's a question! Why does HN style it like that?".

Every time.

(comment deleted)
I wanted to join the revolution but could not read the small text, sorry. Maybe the mobile revolution first?
When I came across low contrast text articles in the past, I used to manually edit the pages css to fix the font, now I just close the tab and never go back.
I use the reader-mode on Firefox. Sometimes, pipe it through outline.com and brow.sh (now-defunct)
Yeah, it's pretty rich to complain about UX on your webpage that hijacks scroll.
I love that the website demonstrates why the “rebellion” will fail. The designers of the site know about one annoying thing, enough to lecture others, but are perfectly oblivious to another even more annoying thing that they themselves do.
(comment deleted)
Lol, that website is completely unreadable on my iPhone because of the random jumping while trying to scroll.
Don't let the use of a "function over form" argument trick you, this is a fashion argument for fashion people.

These arguments use whatever cudgel is nearby to make their points. Principal is not about principals, it's about proving their taste in fashion superior.

But do you agree that low contrast text is hard to read?
Classic form-over-function scenario. If you're only paying attention to the aesthetics of a block of text—rather than actually reading it—it becomes a noisy and chaotic thing, to be reined in and reconciled to other elements in the visual grid.
Black on pickle green isn't at all that readable. And neither is light pickle green on dark pickle green.
Regardless of whether this particular webpage is a good example of web design and readability, I think the point is well made: is it true that low contrast text is hard to read? I think it is.

Scroll hijacking is a separate issue that must be addressed separately.

I agree, but beyond scroll hijacking the text is so teeny on my Android I can barely read it, which is highly ironic given the subject matter.
As someone who worked as a freelance color corrector for film: Although you should always value accessability and consider those who are not blessed with perfect eye sight, the part where it says that this isn't subjective bothers me.

I can assure you from many talks I had with customers: There is nearly nothing more subjective than color perception. Some people will be bothered by a low contrast, others by a high contrast. They are not bothered because they are wrong, they are bothered because what feels good to them is different.

Additionally the whole thing depends more than we would like on the screens used.

That high contrast example on a low contrast screen might physically have the same brightness difference as the low contrast example on a expensive high contrast screen. Screen contrast certainly increased during the last two/three decades. Do we adjust our guidelines to this?

Is there such a thing as too high contrast? Ask yourself, watch out of the window and try to focus on the part where dark and light meet, depending on the weather and light direction this contrast can be high enough to be uncomfortable to your eyes.

Of course the opposite is true as well, too low contrast can be extremely exhausting either. But both differ with individuals: Some will find a high contrast to be perfectly easy on their eyes and far more readable, while for others it might be too much and exhaust them over longer periods. People who work with colors commercially have to strike a good balance here and take their own (often more sensitive) perception out of the equation.

> Some people will be bothered by a low contrast, others by a high contrast.

Being bothered by high contrast is very exceptional and can't be compared, being hard to see and unpleasing to see are entirely different problems. In one you need to strain your eyes and the other to adjust your aesthetic sensibilities.

> Being bothered by high contrast is very exceptional

It isn't very exceptional, it is just less common than problems with low contrast (mostly for demographic reasons). It is also the main reason why every display has a Brightness setting and why proper workspace illumination is important for the health of your eyes.

I agree that accessability is important, and excessive use of low contrast, thin or small fonts is not acceptable because it affects the higher percentage of people. However:

1. Saying that higher contrast is better objectively for everybody is and not a matter of personal preference is false, because it isn't. Some people prefer their contrast not to be high and these people exist. I worked with them.

2. On the web gladly we can offer multiple versions of a page (and potentially even re-style what we see). Light and dark themes are a good example for this. Instead of deciding on one thing that fits all people maybe we should think more in terms of providing the best thing for multiple needs.

For a while, in my Ad Limiter add-on, I tried still showing ads, but displaying them at low contrast, as less-desirable search results. But taking them out completely worked better.
An incredible usability own goal. One of the problems with low contrast text is readability in non-ideal lighting, such as outside on mobile. But this site is hardly usable on mobile at all.
I especially like the dark blue on black "TWEET" text on the site.
Past threads:

The Contrast Rebellion - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26046190 - Feb 2021 (5 comments)

The Contrast Rebellion - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14575153 - June 2017 (46 comments)

Contrast Rebellion - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9442322 - April 2015 (70 comments)

Ask HN: Fixing low contrast websites on the client side - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9020408 - Feb 2015 (4 comments)

Webdesigners: please make text readable - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2807047 - July 2011 (106 comments)

I recently discovered that I have an astigmatism in one eye, which I can only partially correct with glasses. I don't need to wear prescription lenses day to day, but one thing I noticed immediately was how much easier high contrast text is to read. Without my glasses, any significant contrast has a slightly out of focus halo, making thin lettering just a tiny bit harder to read.

I'm sure due to this condition that I can't speak for the majority of the population, but it seems to suggest this: everyone's eyes are different. Sometimes in tiny, subtle ways. In my case, a tiny bit less contrast helps tremendously with legibility, and I find dark themes easier to read because the halo is less pronounced. Other users might have a different experience. As much as possible, accommodating user preference (especially light / dark theme) will help those of us who need to tweak further tremendously.