[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: pronouncing required fields

From: Victor Engmark
Subject: Re: pronouncing required fields
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 12:25:58 +0200

On 5/13/07, Davi Leal <address@hidden> wrote:
Davi Leal wrote:
> Victor Engmark wrote:
> > The reason I didn't suggest deepening the color is that it decreases the
> > contrast, and therefore the legibility. Also, it doesn't show up when
> > colors are disabled. Maybe 1px wider border in almost full red would be
> > better? E.g
> >
> > .required
> > {
> >         border: 3px inset #F30;
> > }
> Done. I will check how it looks tonight.

At my PC, it totally breaks the graphic design of the website. I have changed
it to the below one so it sucks less. You can check at your laptop:

            border: 2px inset #F30;

I think the problem at your laptop will not be fixed changing colours but
setting borders, etc. Isn't it?

Any other visual cue than just colors would be nice. Perhaps the asterisk could be made bigger, and / or we could use a (very light) pattern background on the fields? Patterns are generally much easier to notice than color alone.

Take note that if we hide all the not-required fields, maybe it will not be
needed to pronounce so much the required fields.

We should probably still emphasize them. Consider that otherwise we would have to change their appearance when "un-hiding" the optional fields, or make the optional fields even less emphasized.

Anyway, I will not commit this changes up to we all agree, and work well both
on laptops and on PCs.

It's not a big issue. It's just that because the low contrast on the laptop screen (even at full brightness), and the small asterisk, it was difficult to use the current visual cues to find the required fields fast.

Victor Engmark
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur - What is said in Latin, sounds profound
reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]