The Adblock Project Forum Index The Adblock Project
Pull up a seat ...stay a while.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

PLEASE I beg you, change the front page style

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Adblock Project Forum Index -> Main
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jakob Nielsen
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2005    Post subject: PLEASE I beg you, change the front page style Reply with quote

You have made everything look semi-opaque and it is disturbing, and rubbish design.

Please set text to black, so we can read it, and place the images at the correct gamma or something, it is really.... arrogant... to design a website like that.

Anyone else agree?
Back to top
Ken Cooper



Joined: 29 Dec 2004
Posts: 110
Location: Holland, MI USA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think if we conducted a poll the majority would agree. I use this bookmarklet on very few sites where the author doesn't use complimentary colors.

Bookmarklet -ZapColors

Code:

javascript:(function(){var newSS, styles='* { background: white ! important; color: black !important } :link, :link * { color: #0000EE !important } :visited, :visited * { color: #551A8B !important }'; if(document.createStyleSheet) { document.createStyleSheet(%22javascript:'%22+styles+%22'%22); } else { newSS=document.createElement('link'); newSS.rel='stylesheet'; newSS.href='data:text/css,'+escape(styles); document.getElementsByTagName(%22head%22)[0].appendChild(newSS); } })();

_________________
My Firefox Page
NOTE: Firefox is spelled “F-i-r-e-f-o-x”; only the first letter capitalized. The preferred abbreviation is “Fx” or “fx”.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zachariah



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 703
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no response to that.
_________________
• Latest Adblock!

• If all else fails try a really fresh install of Firefox
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ian Brandt
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I certainly agree that the page is unreadable! Please update it immediately. If you need a patch I'll do it. I can't promote Adblock and Firefox by referring people to an unreadable page. Unless I look dead-on the text is nearly invisible on my Powerbook. In fact if I view from about 10 degrees above the text actually IS invisible.
Back to top
Zachariah



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 703
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian Brandt wrote:
I can't promote Adblock and Firefox by referring people to an unreadable page
can't you just direct them to the page "(Adblock", http://adblock.mozdev.org/dev.html) in my signature?, or even directly to the .xpi file?

I mean, sure it's annoying, but is it really enough to prevent using the extension?
_________________
• Latest Adblock!

• If all else fails try a really fresh install of Firefox
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Luhmann
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2005    Post subject: Please! Reply with quote

Yes, please. It is awful!!!!
Back to top
liam
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2005    Post subject: no doubt Reply with quote

the page is unreadable. what purpous does an unreadable page serve?
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the devs are dead... or laughing
Back to top
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2005    Post subject: Site colours Reply with quote

As a diabetic with eye problems I would like to cut through all the users' arguments about colour schemes, good Web design and the flippant responses by the Web site designers to requests for the site colours to be changed:

In simple terms, the site is bad for people with eyesight problems and in the UK at least could well be breaking the law - the UK Disability Discrimination Act - so forget all the smart *** comments - why not sort out the colours for a good practical reason?
Back to top
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2005    Post subject: Disability information Reply with quote

Further to my previous post: For your perusal - my stuff's in brackets:

(W3C Checklist of Checkpoints for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0: )

http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html

(Hope you're not in the UK...)

UK DDA:

# 4.7 (p39): “From 1st October 1999 a service provider has to take reasonable steps to change a practice which makes it unreasonably difficult for disabled people to make use of its services.”

# 5.23 (p71): “For people with visual impairments, the range of auxiliary aids or services which it might be reasonable to provide to ensure that services are accessible might include ... accessible websites.”

Can you be sued?

Almost certainly, yes. The RNIB has approached two large companies with regard to their websites. When they raised the accessibility issues of the websites under the DDA, both companies made the necessary changes, rather than facing the prospect of legal action (in exchange for anonymity).

The DRC launched a formal investigation into 1000 websites, of which over 80% were next to impossible for disabled people to use. They issued a stern warning that organisations will face legal action under the DDA and the threat of unlimited compensation payments if they fail to make websites accessible for people with disabilities.

(my BOLD below)

The courts will also no doubt take guidance from the outcome of an Australian case in 2000, when a blind man successfully sued the Sydney Olympics organising committee over their inaccessible website. (The Australian Disability Discrimination Act quite closely resembles that of the UK's.) UK courts may also take into account the New York case against Ramada.com and Priceline.com, who were also successfully sued over the accessibility of their websites.



Don't get me wrong - I'm not going to sue! - but I'm pointing out that there are compelling reasons to change the Web site's design simply on the basis of helping people like me with vision problems - aint that a good enough reason?
Back to top
psychofox



Joined: 16 Apr 2005
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2005    Post subject: chill Reply with quote

Folks, I think you need to remember that the adblock developers don't owe you anything at all. If you think the page design has issues (and I must admit, I'm not a fan), sure, tell them. But to suggest that they could be sued... I have to ask, what planet are you on? I live in the UK, and I have to say, your interpretation of the DDA is complete nonsense.

To Jacob Nielsen, have you any idea how arrogant your post sounds?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2005    Post subject: Re: Site colours Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
In simple terms, the site is bad for people with eyesight problems and in the UK at least could well be breaking the law - the UK Disability Discrimination Act - so forget all the smart *** comments - why not sort out the colours for a good practical reason?


Yeah, threats are really the best way to make someone change their mind. Good job, asshole - if I were site designer, I'd keep the current design for a while just to spite your ***.

However, I too think the current design is very bad. It's hard to read, and nothing is really gained from having it (that I can see).

Why have you got such a design and why are you so fond of it?
Back to top
Zachariah



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 703
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2005    Post subject: Re: Site colours Reply with quote

Anonymous wrote:
Why have you got such a design and why are you so fond of it?

I wrote:
I have no response to that.
... because I didn't (for the first time) link to all the other threads on this issue where it is mentioned why things are the way they are and if they'll ever change, and why they would ever change.
_________________
• Latest Adblock!

• If all else fails try a really fresh install of Firefox
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Visually impaired & a
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2005    Post subject: Re: Site colours Reply with quote

Zachariah wrote:
... because I didn't (for the first time) link to all the other threads on this issue where it is mentioned why things are the way they are and if they'll ever change, and why they would ever change.

Okay, so I had a search for myself. I was not able to find a single explanation of why things are the way they are - other than that allegedly the site is legible on rue's Mac (though dozens of users with Macs claim that this is not the case on theirs) - and the only mentions I could find about anything to do with efforts to improve matters was the statement by wonkothesane on March 30th that (a) somebody had actually fixed the problem, and (b) rue had immediately reverted all their changes and made the site illegible again.

So it's not a case of "the design is fine for most people" - there appears to be only ONE person who thinks the design is fine, i.e. rue. Nor is it a case of "we want to concentrate on more important things" - not only did someone have time to fix it, but rue had time to go in and deliberately break it again!

Get with the program, guys. The site is not legible to a large number of users, as the number of threads objecting to the problems prove. The site can be made legible trivially, as the bookmarklets posted in every complaint thread prove. So why on earth is the site not only still illegible, but apparently deliberately illegible by the choice of the developers?

If you can point me to the thread that explains that, Zachariah, as opposed to the dozens of complaint threads which do not actually contain any valid justifications of the current design or explanations of why rue is so resistant to the thought of making the site usable for the majority of users, then I would appreciate it. Thank you for your time.
Back to top
Org



Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Posts: 349

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

My guess: old content is washed-out intentionally to give visual clue it's old. New content is clearly readable. See the new features and keyboard shortcuts on the dev page.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flp
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I work for a web development company in the UK, and a lot of our clients websites are undergoing or have undergone redevelopment to meet accessibility standards.

I'd be glad to mock up a half-decent standards-based (and therfore accessible) web site in XHTML and CSS if someone else is willing to apply the template properly throughout the site.

I'll watch this thread and see Smile

Great extension though, keep up the good work!

If you like this extension and are remotely interested in web development may I also recommend:

- Aardvark (not on Mozilla, Google for 'aardvark firefox extension')
- Remove it Permanently (RIP)
- Web Developer Toolbar
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Adblock Project Forum Index -> Main All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group