You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
People with red green blindness can't distinguish the default colors for "yes" (99cc66) and "no" (ff9966). This affects about 5% of the people (with men more often affected than women).
I met a guy with red green blindness and we agreed on the following colors, which can be distinguished:
Red (no): c43131
Green (yes): 90db46
Yellow (maybe): ffe800
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
While I understand the suggestion and would like to make sure we find a good solution, I think these high contrast colors look too massive...
I could imagine a high-contrast mode to be toggleable and automatically generated from the color scheme (just crank up the contrast programmatically). I would also rewrite how background colors are assigned to the cells in the same step.
I think it's better to support people with disabilities without having them to enable some special mode. You could try the following colors, which are less "massive" but still distinguishable:
I realize this might be a matter of taste, but even without having red-green-blindness, I prefer the first set of high-contrast colors @hprid proposed to the current default (and to his second suggestion). To me, the strong contrast emphasizes the pattern of choices and makes it easier to get a feeling for the vote distribution at a quick glance. Since this is the primary information a Dudel poll conveys, I think it is a good idea to highlight it.
People with red green blindness can't distinguish the default colors for "yes" (99cc66) and "no" (ff9966). This affects about 5% of the people (with men more often affected than women).
I met a guy with red green blindness and we agreed on the following colors, which can be distinguished:
Red (no): c43131
Green (yes): 90db46
Yellow (maybe): ffe800
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: