Originally Posted by aallkkaa
Well, that's often the thing with easily readable stuff: it often doesn't look all that pretty. And inversely, pretty layouts and graphics are often not very readable.
But some of the tools provided by the WCAG do allow you to test some color schemes and, in one go, see how they look on screen as well as get a rating for their readablity. So I reckon they're useful in helping you make a good decision in this regard.  |
Certain tools are useful, sure... I wasn't talking about them, I personally don't find the way the text on certain pages is organised/formatted to be easy to read at all, but I digress.
On topic though, it's nigh impossible to make an artwork-heavy UI to be colour-blind-friendly while being appealing to the rest of the audience w/o colour sensitivity issues if you want to use universal colour-blind-friendly pallete.
Universal colour-blind-friendly palletes are garbage, in most cases they look like shit to your average person w/ normal vision, they are also too conservative to express many things. Want to show green health bar and blue mana bars, eh? Good luck w/ that, or you'll make all tritanopes very sad >_>
Colour mapping and/or multiple colourblind-friendly pallete presets do work in many cases, but they aren't optimal either, esp if you have to convey a lot of info via status bars, in this case status bars' textures w/ patterns is the safest and best solution, they can also be incorporated into your design, but unlike the aforementioned colour-based approaches, it's time-consuming to develop, and, if we're talking about commercial products, we aren't
, it's more expensive as well.
And, as a "colour-weak" person, I think that hobbyists should ignore this stuff entirely, unless they really want to do it. We're like <5% of the user base, that's assuming we're represented proportionally.