Typographer vs. Accessibility
summary
Debunks common rules with numbers and tools: 1.1 billion people sit between full sight and blindness (510M near vision, 258M mild, 295M moderate–severe, 43M blind). Shows a self-built banking app prototype that failed low-contrast checks (examples: 1.64:1, button 3.59:1) and fixes using WCAG 4.5:1 / 3:1 thresholds and contrast checkers. Tests type choices (serif vs sans not absolute), finds Atkinson Hyperlegible and other careful designs outperform Comic Sans/OpenDyslexic for most readers, and gives concrete rules: 16px base, 60–80 char line length, ~1.5 line-height, spacing ratios.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (12)
- 0:00Introduction and jokes
- 2:56Typography accessibility overview
- 9:02Legibility vs readability
- 11:57Sans vs serif fonts
- 19:30Dyslexia and typefaces
- 24:46Readability quick wins
- 26:20Color contrast myths
- 32:18Font size guidelines
- 36:38Spacing and line length
- 43:15Accessibility design principles
- 45:00Q&A on typefaces and branding
- 56:00Closing challenge and summary
related talks
39mTypographer vs. Accessibility
45mTypography and accessibility
46mRESPONSIBLE RESPONSIVE TYPOGRAPHY: A CRASH-COURSE ON VARIABLE FONTS AND ACCESSIBILITY
30mWriting CSS with Accessibility in Mind
36mThe Human Side of Accessibility
40mBeyond Aesthetics: Designing with Color for Accessibility and Inclusion
24mAccessibility-Driven Design
48mTypography, Readability and Digital Accessibility