Photo post

Fri 11 Jun 2010 10 notes | Posted by rocketpilot

lachstock:

benw:


White 2000×1500

Please forgive me, but I’m going to be an unrelenting bitch about this Google background thing for just a moment longer:

When you eventually figure out how to get a white background back on Google.com (once the background picker tool eventually loads—it will probably force you to log in again first—look under ‘Editors Picks’, and then ‘White’) you may notice a few things:

On a white background, the text is still white, so you’ll be reading everything by shadow shape. Users of Microsoft Internet Explorer (which has shitty support for text-shadow) are screwed (screenshot.)
‘White’—which you and I and everyone else would just consider a colour—is in fact still served up by Google as an image.
That image is named ‘White-2000×1500’.
Sounds large, right? Don’t panic, the actual image dimensions are 1600×1200.
Which is still an extra HTTP request and 11KB over the wire.
And it’s loaded as an <img> element, rather than a background image.
And that <img> doesn’t have any alt text, so screen readers are going to try and infer what it might mean. Like, they’re going to read out: “http://lh6.ggpht.com/_fxkujw2mA9U/TA79kGonjWI/AAAAAAAAAO8/wgt1U7ogm0k/e365/white-2000x1500.jpg”.
Where was Steve Sounders when they shit this one out?

Who implements background customization with only support for images anyway?

What‽


It appears that Google’s gone completely barking mental.

lachstock:

benw:

White 2000×1500

Please forgive me, but I’m going to be an unrelenting bitch about this Google background thing for just a moment longer:

When you eventually figure out how to get a white background back on Google.com (once the background picker tool eventually loads—it will probably force you to log in again first—look under ‘Editors Picks’, and then ‘White’) you may notice a few things:

  1. On a white background, the text is still white, so you’ll be reading everything by shadow shape. Users of Microsoft Internet Explorer (which has shitty support for text-shadow) are screwed (screenshot.)
  2. ‘White’—which you and I and everyone else would just consider a colour—is in fact still served up by Google as an image.
  3. That image is named ‘White-2000×1500’.
  4. Sounds large, right? Don’t panic, the actual image dimensions are 1600×1200.
  5. Which is still an extra HTTP request and 11KB over the wire.
  6. And it’s loaded as an <img> element, rather than a background image.
  7. And that <img> doesn’t have any alt text, so screen readers are going to try and infer what it might mean. Like, they’re going to read out: “http://lh6.ggpht.com/_fxkujw2mA9U/TA79kGonjWI/AAAAAAAAAO8/wgt1U7ogm0k/e365/white-2000x1500.jpg”.

Where was Steve Sounders when they shit this one out?

Who implements background customization with only support for images anyway?

What‽

It appears that Google’s gone completely barking mental.

  1. rocketpilot reblogged this from lachstock and added:
    It appears that Google’s gone completely barking mental.
  2. lachstock reblogged this from benw
  3. benw posted this