You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Came across a new (to me) contrast checker at https://github.com/ThePacielloGroup/CCAe. One advantage of this checker is that you can "lock in" shades and, using the left and right arrows, change r, g, and b at the same time.
I was playing with its extra features and decided to give the rating star thing a try with the original background of #ffffff as I've never been fond of the workaround we had to do.
The result was #987000 which looks like a viable alternative. It's especially better than having the #322424 background with #efa31d and it meets the color contrast ratio for that item in all the testers I have at my disposal.
Take a look at the result on haredoDOTcom and see what you think. If you like it, throw it in whenever you feel appropriate.
I didn't want to muddy up the important stuff with a PR for this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Using #987000 with #ffffff as the background is the absolute minimum contrast that still looks like gold and exceeds minimums at 4.51:1 in contrast, which is what I intended with the original post.
The current default of #efs31d results in a contrast ratio of 2.12:1. Total failure.
Came across a new (to me) contrast checker at https://github.com/ThePacielloGroup/CCAe. One advantage of this checker is that you can "lock in" shades and, using the left and right arrows, change r, g, and b at the same time.
I was playing with its extra features and decided to give the rating star thing a try with the original background of #ffffff as I've never been fond of the workaround we had to do.
The result was #987000 which looks like a viable alternative. It's especially better than having the #322424 background with #efa31d and it meets the color contrast ratio for that item in all the testers I have at my disposal.
Take a look at the result on haredoDOTcom and see what you think. If you like it, throw it in whenever you feel appropriate.
I didn't want to muddy up the important stuff with a PR for this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: