Web Readability on Dark Background
Posted: June 8, 2009 at 14:00:46 by Dani Iswara. Words count: 493.
Last updated: June 11, 2009 at 00:26:46.
"...a brain-based type of learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read. These individuals typically read at levels significantly lower than expected despite having normal intelligence." Source: dyslexia on National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)) users may need more contrast, black on white or even yellow background. Very low vision users will choose the opposite to read the web effectively. White or yellow text on a black background has a better contrast for their eyes. What color should we choose? How to increase its readability? What is the rules? There are no rules that we must use light or white color as a web page background. Roger Johansson on Light Text on Dark Background vs Readability said he has a difficulty to read white on black. If you think that the dark background must be the only choice, Mark Boulton on Five Simple Steps to Better Typography suggested:
When reversing colour out, eg white text on black, make sure you increase the leading, tracking and decrease your font-weight...In my perception, the practices are:
- more line-height and/or line spacing,
- thin font type,
- sans-serif (e.g. Verdana, Arial, Tahoma) fonts for smaller size, not serif,
- left-aligned (see my Indonesian post, on Do not Use Justified Text).
- Verdana is more readable than Arial for the sans-serif type. Especially for the I and l (L) fonts. Verdana is larger than Arial.
- Helvetica (available on Linux machine) is the old form of Arial. So web designers should only put Helvetica or Arial. Not both of them.
Comment by Triyono on June 8, 2009 at 15:37:50
using Firefox 2.0.0.20 on Windows XP
Dear doc,
Saya pernah terapkan latar belakang gelap, tetapi rasanya jadi terlalu berat, lebih-lebih jika browsing memakai handphone, terkadang bahkan bidang putih yang menjadi latar belakang teks tidak sempat terdown load, sehingga teks jadi sulit dibaca.
Comment by nomercy on June 8, 2009 at 17:46:36
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Linux Mint 7
apa kabare mas? :D
agak OOT nih:
mengapa browser Opera di linux dari dahulu masih juga gak bisa mengimplementasikan anti-aliasing secara default ya ... terkadang sudah susah2 seting font di Qt masih juga tetap gak bisa ... biasanya saya akalin dengan memaksa Opera memakai font standar helve supaya lebih terbaca ...
yg nggak OOT (barangkali):
saya baru terasa setelah berusaha banyak mencari artikel mengenai hal ini, terutama yg menyediakan berbagai link situs contoh ... setelah dirasakan bener ternyata memang seratus persen bener ... di salah satu artikel luar diberikan contoh seandainya surat kabar, baik online maupun yang tidak memakai latar belakang gelap ... hahaha ... baru satu berita saja saya sudah pusing ... mereka membuat duplikat berbagai online news dengan background gelap ... :D
... entahlah masalah mau nasionalis atau bukan, theme songket yg lalu apakah masih bisa dibilang layak tayang, mas? ... :)
Comment by Cahya on June 8, 2009 at 19:30:14
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows Vista
Jangan lupa, DaniIswara.Net juga menggunakan background gelap, tuh sisi kanan dan kirinya hitam semua :D
Walau berusaha kemudian menempelkan plester putih di atas tulisan hitamnya, tetap saja saya sering pusing bacanya (ilmunya ga kesampaian). But its always nice, think black :)
Comment by dani on June 8, 2009 at 19:53:42
using Opera 10.00 on GNU/Linux
Pak Tri,
mungkin:
1) ada javascript yang memberatkan
2) make gambar sebagai latar
3) atau situsnya belum memiliki versi mobile
4) koneksi Inet memang lambat, maaf, pak.. :)
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 8, 2009 at 20:00:43
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
Pak Ardiansyah,
lagi memble , pak..
untuk yang Opera, kalo ngga salah sejak Opera 6.x sudah bisa anti-aliasing terintegrasi pake pustaka Qt-3 di Linux, baik dengan Opera static atau dynamic. selebihnya silakan telusuri di knowledge base Opera.
berarti situ memang sudah berumur, pak.. :P
theme-nya lanjut Pak, selera orang kan macem-macem.. :)
Comment by dani on June 8, 2009 at 20:10:18
using Opera 10.00 on GNU/Linux
Cahya,
iya juga sih. :) [ngeles mode: on] tapi itu kan bagian yang tidak diisi teks.
[ngeles ergonomis dan fisiologis mode: on] karena satu kolom narrowed, saya merasa dengan latar relatif lebih gelap tapi tidak terlalu kontras, maka fokus mata akan tertuju ke kolom tengah pada teks berada.
[masih ngeles alibi mode: on] jika latar hitam itu saya ganti putih/terang, sepertinya akan terlalu silau karena area putih yang mendominasi. kecuali lebar konten menyajikan teks mendekati seukuran layar penuh. cmiiw
ada saran..? [trial mode: on] :)
ah..ini juga masi raba-raba..kan memang the most unessential.. :P
Comment by Cahya on June 9, 2009 at 01:43:49
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows Vista
Jangan lupa, DaniIswara.Net juga menggunakan background gelap, tuh sisi kanan dan kirinya hitam semua :D
Walau berusaha kemudian menempelkan plester putih di atas tulisan hitamnya, tetap saja saya sering pusing bacanya (ilmunya ga kesampaian). But its always nice, think black :)
ps.: koq, saya sering disalahin yang ngisi sum, padahal hitungnya dah bener (pakai scientific calculator lagi), apa karena ping time-nya kelamaan?
Comment by Cahya on June 9, 2009 at 01:45:42
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows Vista
Itu susahnya, memilih fungsi atau estetika ^_^?
Comment by sandalian on June 9, 2009 at 01:56:05
using Opera 10.00 on Mac OS X
When I meet a page with black background and light colored text, I prefer to click "User mode" in my browser.
It will display the page as plain HTML, easier to read :D
Comment by dani on June 9, 2009 at 02:09:34
using Opera 10.00 on GNU/Linux
pas lagi update time server mungkin..
Comment by dani on June 9, 2009 at 02:11:49
using Opera 10.00 on GNU/Linux
sandalian,
so, perhaps, you were in elderly category also. :P
Comment by dani on June 9, 2009 at 02:15:03
using Opera 10.00 on GNU/Linux
Cahya,
saya pilih fungsi. estetika pendukung. karena saya ngga punya rasa seni. :)
Comment by uwiuw on June 9, 2009 at 02:24:08
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
iya, dan, sy juga mencoba mengikuti Mark Boulton. Setidaknya pada bagian konten. Terutama bagian font weight itu. selain itu tinggi huruf (dalam css, line height) harus konsisten tingginya biar teratur gerakan turun naik mata saat membaca
dan ini, dari temen sy di studio, dia ngasih masukan ke saya untuk stick sama times roman. walau pun font jadul tp tetep orang paling familier sama jenis font ini, terutama pada print media. Verdana memang lebih mudah dibaca tp pertimbangkan font times roman bila konten (dan bukan sidebar atau yg lainnya)
Comment by Cahya on June 9, 2009 at 02:31:18
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows Vista
He he..., medicine is one of the famous art on earth that exist till today...
Still there a physician notes that he does not have any of it ...
Ah..., really a Baliness would say with a begining "Tlebingkah batan biu..."
Just joke for refreshing :D
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 9, 2009 at 02:44:32
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
Cahya,
ah ya you were right.. :) actually, I am a medical artist at least..
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 9, 2009 at 03:40:33
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
uwiuw,
untuk times new roman/serif, kalo ukuran font-nya gede mungkin ngga masalah. sepertinya perlu nyari bukti tambahan dulu kalo belum percaya bahwa baca huruf serif di layar berkedip (monitor) jangka waktu lama itu sebenarnya amat melelahkan... :)
kecuali posting pendek-pendek.
untuk print media saya pake serif juga. verdana saya pilih untuk on screen karena lebih besar dan renggang. juga lebih usable untuk huruf I dan l (L), misal: Ill, Illness, Illusion, Illegal, Illustration.
setidaknya headings dan konten baiknya beda font type katanya.
dari daftar 33 situs di atas, 1 kadaluwarsa/diparkir. kalo ngga salah ngitung, 27 dari 32 (84,38%) make tipe sans-serif. :)
Comment by rismaka on June 9, 2009 at 11:47:47
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
Memang benar, bahwa font hitam dg latar belakang putih lebih mudah dibaca daripada font putih latar belakang gelap (hitam/biru muda). Tapi kenapa ya, beberapa ada themes wordpress dengan tulisan yang dibuat blur (warna ke-abu-abuan), ukuran font yang kecil, dan latar belakang putih. Hal tersebut justru mempersulit para pembaca. Saya sendiri sangat malas bila berkunjung ke blog penganut layout seperti itu.
Biasanya saya kalau mau membacanya harus di-zoom 1.5 X. Kalau masih kurang jelas, saya blok teks tersebut. Atau kalau memang tidak jelas juga, saya copy kemudian paste di wordpad (huuuhhhhh... bikin capek aja. Mending klo artikelnya bagus. Lah klo cuma artikel cuap2 yang ga jelas??? Mending ga usah datang lagi aja ke blog itu :D )
Comment by rismaka on June 9, 2009 at 11:51:16
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
OOT: Mas dani sendiri ada kesulitan ga kalau membaca dengan text justify?
Comment by dani on June 9, 2009 at 14:37:43
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
Mas Adi,
mengenai theme itu, mungkin setelan huruf (minimum font size) di sisi perambannya (pengelola/pemilik theme) berbeda.
yang huruf keabuan, beda monitor mungkin beda efek, pc dan mac aja biasanya beda kan..asumsinya theme itu untuk mata normal.
ya sebagai pengguna yang baik, ngalah lah Mas Adi.. :)
ah jangan-jangan Mas Adi saat itu sambil disable images ya.. :) [harus lebih banyak mengalah lagi]
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 9, 2009 at 14:47:02
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
Mas Adi,
sepertinya ngga masalah asal jelas blok paragrafnya (mungkin beda untuk yang disleksia). tapi untuk scanning, kesannya lebih cepet dan mudah rata tepi kiri. :)
Comment by nomercy on June 10, 2009 at 03:57:28
using Firefox 3.8 on GNU/Linux
no no no ... saya gak setuju kalau huruf jenis times dipakai buat kontent dengan latar gelap ... jadi tambah kurus dan sering hilang bagian kurusnya ... :D
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 04:24:05
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
nomercy,
kalo serif-nya gede dan berbentuk paragraf singkat (mis. model 'about us' pendek atau slide <10 baris) sepertinya masi bisa dimaklumi kan.. :)
Comment by uwiuw on June 10, 2009 at 09:59:47
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Windows XP
@nomercy bener baget tuh kata si abang. kalau kekurangan times itu suka hilang. Tp bener jg bila kita bikin font weightnya agak lebih lebar (bolder), ngak akan hilang kok, bang
iya, malah bukan sekedar 10 pixel aja dan, ke angka > 18 itu lebih readable. tp themenya harus lebar dan enggak 800px. minimalnya 1024px.
oh iya, bang and dani, sy belum bisa jawab komentar di blog baka. Sampe sy nyelesain kerjaan. sorri, yah.
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 10:13:25
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
uwiuw,
maksud saya memang jumlah baris, bukan ukuran piksel. tapi tentang piksel itu bener juga ya.
blogger Indonesia sopan-sopan ya. :)
Comment by ganda on June 10, 2009 at 15:40:44
using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP
kok saya sering gagal kasih komentar?
Comment by ganda on June 10, 2009 at 15:42:48
using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP
hahaa... saya termasuk penganut yang satu ini. background putih dengan text abu(tapi hanya untuk saat ini). theme yang akan saya pakai selanjutnya dalam proses reconstruksi...
Comment by ganda on June 10, 2009 at 15:48:38
using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP
asal jarak antar kata, jarak antar baris dan font sizenya memadai lah. hehehe... iya gak pak dokter?
Comment by ganda on June 10, 2009 at 15:49:08
using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP
atau faktor usia juga pak. hehehe
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 15:55:34
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
ganda,
entahlah, hari ini sepertinya server agak lambat pas saya coba akses dari koneksi berbeda.
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 16:23:54
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
yang bahasa sanskertanya legibility itulah. ada kerning (jarak antar huruf; line-spacing), line-height (spasi baris). :)
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 16:48:53
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
ganda,
sepertinya layak tunggu theme barunya :)
Comment by ganda on June 10, 2009 at 17:19:40
using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP
rada sama dengan pnya pak dokter. Background hitam di sebelah kiri dan kanan.
Comment by ganda on June 10, 2009 at 17:21:24
using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP
untuk spam mathematic ini, di set berapa lama rentang waktu validnya pak?
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 20:32:13
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
ganda,
ngga ada pengaturan waktu validnya. komen terlalu cepet mungkin..cmiiw
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 20:35:53
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
ganda,
kayak punya mas rismaka juga dong.. :)
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 10, 2009 at 20:41:18
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
ganda,
mas sandal di atasnya juga dah saya tembak yang senada :D
Comment by nomercy on June 12, 2009 at 03:22:59
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Linux Mint 7
@Uwiuw,
bener juga ya ... tetapi kalau mesti bikin layarnya fixed width ke 1024 kan kasihan buat yang pakai netbook layar 800 ...
Comment by nomercy on June 12, 2009 at 03:29:03
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Linux Mint 7
ada juga blognya temen yg blogger terkenal punya font kecil-kecil ... saya yang matanya minus jadi mesti zoom juga ... padahal isi blognya saya sangat suka sekali ...
ketika ditanya ternyata layar monitor netbooknya hanya dukung 800 x 600 ... dia melihatnya sih emang gede ... hihihi ...
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 12, 2009 at 03:45:36
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
nomercy,
jangankan yang layarnya memang 800×600px pak, yang sengaja mengatur browser window-nya <1024×768px seperti saya mungkin termasuk minoritas dan terabaikan juga. :(
Comment by ganda on June 12, 2009 at 10:39:26
using Safari 4.0 on Windows XP
bagaimana jika menggunakan relative size? seperti em?
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 12, 2009 at 12:27:18
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
ganda,
setuju mas ganda..tapi yang % mungkin aman di IE. cmiiw
seandainya juga max-width dimengerti (tanpa hacks) oleh semua peramban untuk buat elastic-fluid-flexible layout
*) ternyata abis update otomatis ke wp 2.8, setelan diskusi threaded comment mesti diatur di option (tinggal klik save changes sih) lagi ya..??
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 13, 2009 at 18:40:02
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Gentoo
nomercy,
jadi masih cukup beralasan mengoptimalkan resolusi 800x600 ya. :)
Comment by nomercy on June 14, 2009 at 01:51:07
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Linux Mint 7
yups ... kalau dilihat dari sisi perubahan arah teknologi yang kembali ke gadget kecil dan imut bisa jadi jawabannya iya ... kan tidak mungkin layar di bawah 12" pakai resolusi 1280x1024 ... bisa-bisa semua bermutasi matanya jadi ikut kecil-kecil :D
Comment by nomercy on June 14, 2009 at 02:55:58
using Firefox 3.0.10 on Linux Mint 7
kok saat saya upgrade ke 2.8, thread commentnya gak diatur lagi gak apa-apa mas ...
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 14, 2009 at 10:47:00
using Opera 10.00 on GNU/Linux
nomercy,
saya berharap bisa make CSS untuk variasi lebar layar itu. :)
Comment by Dani Iswara on June 14, 2009 at 11:04:15
using Opera 10.00 on GNU/Linux
nomercy,
entahlah, halaman ini buktinya..tapi kok cuman halaman ini yang aneh ya..yang lain dah balik normal. tes lagi.
Comment by danny bloom on August 3, 2009 at 16:07:43
using Internet Explorer 6.0 on Windows XP
can you blog one day pro or con or both on my idea that we need, maybe, a new word for the new kind of "reading" we do on screens. I do not consider screen-reading as "reading" on paper. Different parts of our brains light up, this has been verified. Screen reading is making us stupid. email me for a chat. i am in Taiwan living near PVI, the firm that runs E-Ink.
I agree that the reading experience on a screen is generally quite
different from what it is with a book. However, if we should change
our vocabulary each time a word takes a different meaning, we would
have various dozens of words just for naming the different modes of
reading in the history of humanity. Two thousand years ago, people
read on scrolls, with no space between words : they had to read aloud
in order to understand. Imagine that ! As a proof, we have a text by
Augustine around 380 telling how he was surprised when he met a
scholar who was reading silently : it was a completely new experience
for him. When "silent reading" began the default mode of reading some
700 years later, the verb did not change but the epithet was dropped,
and we now have to add a precision when we speak about "reading
aloud". You will find more on that topic in my book From papyrus to
Hypertext (University of Illinois Press, 2009).
I find interesting the comparison Anne Mangen makes between reading on
paper and reading on screen. But all printed texts are created equal
nor read alike. We do not read a newspaper the same way we read a
book: we usually scan the newspaper looking for a title that would
catch our interest and then we may decide to read the article at
length or just the first paragraph. Some historians call this kind of
reading "extensive reading" in order to differentiate it from the
"intensive reading" required by a book.
For my part, I would suggest that reading on screen is oriented toward
action: people click, copy and paste, make bookmarks, jump from one
place to another one in order to check the veracity of an affirmation,
vote on the interest of a particular text, and interact with the
author. I call that mode "ergative reading" (from the Greek "ergon":
work). It has been practised by writers, historians and researchers in
general since a long time ago, but today it is becoming the default
mode for most people.
The reading of books should not disappear but it will be a secondary
mode and as such more difficult to adopt if it has not been properly
practised in school. We can however expect that progress in the
technology will make reading on screen more convenient thanks to
legible fonts (Clear Type was an important step), new monitors, a
greater usability in the design of browsers and a way of writing more
adapted to the changing habits of readers.
Comment by danny bloom on August 3, 2009 at 16:09:37
using Internet Explorer 6.0 on Windows XP
Dani, I am Danny, too. from USA in Taiwan now, near Indonesia. I am trying to get the world to listen to me, haha, and change the word READINg to SCREENING for when we "read" on screens, like we are doing now. You are NOT reading this, you are SCREENING it, do you agree? Can you blog on this? EMail me and say hello. I am 60.
Comment by danny bloom on August 3, 2009 at 16:11:52
using Internet Explorer 6.0 on Windows XP
can you blog on this pro or con one day?
DANNY
Do we need a new word for the new kind of "reading" we do on screens?
by Danny Bloom
TAIPEI, TAIWAN -- Are you reading this press release -- or -- are you
screening this? How you answer
this question will determine whether you get to the bottom of this
news release.
Alex Beam, writing in the Boston Globe on June 19, fired the first
volley in this now-national
discussion. "Do we read differently on the computer screen from how we
read on the
printed page?" Beam asked rhetorically. His column was headlined by a
savvy Globe copyeditor: "I screen, you screen, we all screen."
The answer to Beam's question is, of course, yes. From most of the
research that has come in so
far from academics in
North America and Europe, the answer is clear, although not everyone's
in agreement with what it all means.
Yes, screening has multiple meanings. We screen movies, we screen job
candidates, we screen
patients for medical problems, we do a lot of "screening" in this
world of ours. And now, you will be hearing a lot about a new kind of
"screening" -- so-called reading on plastic, pixelated screens.
Dr. Anne Mangen at the
University of Stavanger in Norway tells us what she thinks about the word
"screening" for reading on a screen: "My first
impression is that the term 'screening' is adequate in some
respects, but not in others. It's adequate to the extent that it
points to certain differences in the reading mode which has to do with
the display nature, the central bias of a screen compared to a page of
print text (our gaze is naturally oriented towards the center), and
the image-like character of modalities (we tend to read a screen
spatially, in contrast to the page which we linearly)."
Dr Mangen, in a published academic paper published in Britain last
December, listed a few reasons that reading on paper
and reading on a screen are two very different animals.
* Reading on a screen is not as rewarding -- or effective -- as
reading printed words on paper.
* The process of reading on a screen involves so much physical
manipulation of the
computer that it interferes with our ability to focus on and
appreciate what we're reading.
* Online text moves up and down the
screen and lacks physical dimension, robbing us of a feeling of
completeness.
* The visual happenings on a compter screen and our physical interaction
with the entire device and its set ip can be distracting. All of these things
tax human cognition and concentration in a way that a book or
newspaper or magazine does not.
* The experience of reading a book or a newspaper or a magazine is
both a story experience and a tactile one.
The jury's still out on just how different reading on paper is
from reading on a screen, but the public discussions in the blogsphere
are getting interesting -- and heated. But more and more, top experts
in the computer and Internet fields, as well as typeface designers and
readability gurus, are in agreement that we need a new word
for reading on screens, and that the word should be "screening." For
now. A completely new word might come down the information highway in
the future and take the place of screening. But for now, you screen, I
screen, we all screen.
We asked Kevin Kelly, the well-respected maverick of Wired magazine,
what he felt about this
new word for reading on screens, he told us by email in one short sentence: "I
would be happy to see screening become a verb (for this)."
Mim Harrison, a book editor in Florida with Levenger Press, said: "I find the
distinction between reading and screening to be intriguing, and it
certainly gives us all pause to consider just what it is we're doing
with our eyeballs these days."
"Screening, of course, is not a new term," a top expert in predicting
the future told us in a recent email, but this might just be the
time that it catches on in the way you suggest. Screening is a clever
and useful term capturing the fact that the
experience of reading on a screen is fundamentally different from reading
on paper. Not a priori worse or better; just different."
And then he added this important note: "It is the right word for the
moment in terms of drawing people's attention to the vast literary
shift about to wash over us."
When we asked technology reporter John Markoff at the New York Times
about this idea, he replied in a one-word email note: "Hmmmmmmm."
We asked David Pogue at the New York Times the same question, and he
said: "Very interesting."
--------------------------
Danny Bloom is a freelance writer based in Taiwan. He blogs at
Zippy1300. Opinions expressed in guest posts are those of their
authors, and don't necessarily reflect the views of staff.
Comment by Dani Iswara on August 3, 2009 at 16:57:08
using Firefox 3.5.1 on Gentoo
Danny,
sure, we are screening while reading the light screen--monitor. So, special texts such as bold (strong emphasis), italic (emphasis), underlined (=links), short sentences, and block of paragraphs are very important.
Comment by Danny Blom on August 3, 2009 at 21:47:28
using Internet Explorer 6.0 on Windows XP
Hi Dani
thanks for writing back...... do you think this new word SCREENING,
for reading on screens, might catch on around the world, in English? I
feel that READING is reading on paper, and I love that best of
all....but i also like SCREENING to get new info and read
emails....but I feel it is a different kind of reading, so i coined
the world SCREENING using the old word of screen, and adding ING to
it. Nothing new under the sun. But good idea or bad idea? I want to
use this word to help people THINK about how the two different reading
modes are so DIFFERENT, and maybe need separate words to describe
them. Most people disagree with me, but I am determined to push this
word forward, just to highlight how different the two reading modes
are. But of course, reading is still reading. yes
SMILE
Danny in Taiwan
Comment by Dani Iswara on August 3, 2009 at 22:32:07
using Firefox 3.5.1 on Gentoo
Danny,
what about screen-reading?
Comment by dhenk on September 29, 2009 at 15:59:27
using Firefox 3.0.11 on Ubuntu 9.04
Aku suka latar belakang gelap. Membaca teks putih pada latar belakang gelap lebih mudah pada mata, membuat menyerap lebih sedikit cahaya, sehingga memungkinkan untuk membaca lebih lama tanpa mata merasa tegang... :-)
Comment by Dani Iswara on September 30, 2009 at 08:57:11
using Firefox 3.5.3 on SuSE
dhenk,
ada tulisan tertunda seputar ini. nanti saya publish aja deh.. :)