Due to skinny fonts the internet becomes unreadable.

Older people find it difficult to read web pages due to changes in font in recent years.

Experts have found that the Internet is becoming unreadable due to the evolutionary trend towards “skinny” fonts that worsen the appearance of words on the screen for older people or people with impaired vision.

While the text used to be embossed and dark, and contrasted well with the predominantly white background, now many websites are switching to light gray or blue fonts.
')
The award-winning blogger Kevin Marks, founder of Microformats and former vice president of web services at BT , decided to study the problem after he noticed that he had become more and more difficult to read text on the screen.

I urge designers and software developers: leave your delights and go back to typographical printing.
Kevin Marks

Kevin discovered a “widespread movement” aimed at reducing the contrast between the text and the background, during which all the technological giants - Apple, Google and Twitter - change their typographical principles.

Pure black on a white background text has a maximum achievable contrast ratio of 21: 1. Most technology companies consider it a good practice for a font to have a contrast ratio of at least 7: 1, which allows people with impaired vision to see the text.

However, Mr. Marks found that even Apple’s own typographical directives, recommending a 7: 1 contrast ratio, were written at 5.5: 1.


Many older people use the Internet to stay in touch with their relatives.

Google recommendations also recommend a 7: 1 contrast ratio - and at the same time 54% opacity on the display, which lowers the ratio to 4.6: 1.

Mr. Marx, who was named by The Telegraph as one of the 50 most influential Britons in modern technology, said these changes risk undermining the universal accessibility of the Internet. “The choice of typography by companies such as Apple and Google establishes, in fact, the default design for a large part of the network, and these two design drivers are already on the border of readability of the text,” he warns in a note on Backchannel .

“If a text that is difficult to read prevails in the network, it limits access to it, excludes a large number of people, such as the elderly, people with visual impairments, or those using low-quality screens.

"Since we rely on computers not only to extract some stored information, but also to gain access to services that are sometimes extremely important for our lives, as well as to create some services, everything becomes literally affordable for everyone. more and more important. "


In 2008, the Universal Internet Access Initiative (WAI = Web Accessibility Initiative) introduced a contrast ratio that should help web designers create well-readable sites.

If the text and background are the same color, for example, white on white, then this ratio is 1: 1.
For black text on a white background or white text on a black background, it is maximum - 21: 1.
Black text on a gray background and vice versa is 13: 1; very light gray on white - 3: 1.
However, when the font becomes thinner or more “lightweight”, reading the text becomes difficult.

Changes in typography came because as the web design evolved, the fonts, colors and what served as the background began to deviate from the original set of “safe standards”, which were recognized as discriminating for all users.

The development of LCD technologies and high-resolution screens has also allowed designers to use increasingly thin fonts that normally work on desktop computers, but which are often, in fact, impossible to read on smartphones or tablets.

In recent years, reference books such as the “Typography Handbook” have also recommended that designers not use a lot of contrast, arguing that the traditional “black on white” arrangement strains the eyes excessively and, in particular, prevents people with dyslexia.

In addition, many computers now use dimming while dimming so as not to emit strong light that prevents people from falling asleep.

But the US- based Universal Internet Access Initiative (WAI = Web Accessibility Initiative), which proposed the formula for the initial relationship, in 2008, as a guide to designers, stated that too low a contrast of web pages “prevents people and disappoints their".


Lighter fonts can work well on high-resolution desktop computers, but not smartphones or in relatively high-light environments.

“The choice of colors with low contrast makes navigation, reading and interaction a really painful process,” said a representative of the organization.

“Good design means sufficient contrast between the foreground and background elements. This is especially important for people with reduced sensitivity to contrast, which is more pronounced with age. ”

But Mr. Marks believes that a decrease in contrast can push some users away.

“Arbitrary contrast reduction in the pursuit of fashion, leading to a good picture on my beautiful display in my well-lit office, means the designer’s failure to commit to many people for whom he creates,” he says.

“You need to do better development for people reading on small, dim, displays with middle-aged eyes. This may not be fashionable, but you have to see who is left behind because of your idea of ​​aesthetics. ”

Dr. Simon Harper, an experienced computer scientist who deals with human-computer interaction and information systems at the University of Manchester: “Black text on a white background can create a feeling of a certain rigidity; at the same time, a gray text can produce a softer, more friendly feeling. ”

“But for some people, such design options carry with them a deterioration in intelligibility, understanding, and increased use fatigue. We call this a situational impairment — when it deteriorates a user's performance due to a device, design, environment, or context of use. ”

“If you want to strain to see the text, the interaction stops. In the new world of advanced digital design, we all become vulnerable in some aspect. ”

“Providing the means to allow the user to customize a particular design, rather than an approach where the user is forced to adapt (which is sometimes impossible), is the only viable option,” ends Kevin Marks.