Website Readability / Accessibility


The wiki homepage (discovery [dot] endeavors [dot] com) is hard to read for sight-challenged individuals.


  1. Category Listings are hard to focus on for low-sight persons because they lack visual borders. Cards with simple borders work well. Shadows and rounded corners are awesome. Example: NOTE: Fixing this will require editing of the WP Theme. I highly suggest making a child/sub-theme from the one in use.

  2. No favicon. This IMHO, is needed for every site so they can be saved as links on computers and mobile devices with visual appeal. Link 1: Link 2: NOTE: There are more than two plugins, I just grabbed a couple for reference.

  3. A Table of Contents can be helpful as well, but it might not work visually with the page. It’s just an idea.

More Info:


While this is a very noble cause, which can be fixed to help some people with sight problems…Although admittedly for using terminal-centric Linux distro outside of something like Gnome - they’ll need a lot more help to not go insane while using it…

I wanted to just check out this website and go to home page, when this came:

Are you f**king kiddin’ me?! :rofl:
They seriously threat devs with legal action?!


From now on personally i’ll be making a stroboscope schizophrenic websites specifically and only for this kind of people who make, that’s INSANE!

Every individual has all rights to do any website and design it exactly how one wants to regardless of whoever might not be pleased.


Absolutely for individuals :+1: but if you’re an organisation providing a service, that’s a different kettle of :fish:

As a volunteer organisation, EndeavourOS would need volunteers giving their time & expertise to resolve this.

1 Like

Strongly disagree, that’s still absolutely INSANE, because at the end of the day it’s nothing more than force compliance to <insert_whatever> or else. It’s exactly the same as let’s say forcing legal action against FOSS encrypted messenger devs until they backdoor to all agencies in existence.

Both individuals and organizations on the internet shouldn’t be modeled after fascist ideas.
It’s one thing to suggest to improve or pressure / boycott in a voluntary fashion and completely other thing to force legal action out of nowhere pretending like freedom of association doesn’t exist.

No developer should be forced legally to do anything.

1 Like

Making reasonable adjustments to improve accessibility is not fascist.

That image you posted above about “risk of legal action” (which I can’t find on the website) is not enforceable. You might get an ambulance chasing lawyer who’d try it :clown_face: but they wouldn’t win.

If you as an individual want to do that, go ahead and be a :clown_face: But for an organisation, that would be an unwise choice of action.

I haven’t said that, i was speaking about that legal action crap.

Like i’ve already written clearly before - just follow the link on the op and go to any other page on the site (home for example).

Well i hope so, but the concept of that is still absolutely insane :rofl:

Either you code what i want to that site of yours, OR ELSE!!!11

Thx for explaining a joke! :laughing:

1 Like

There were two websites liked in the post above yours. I’ve found it now, and it is very misleading. If it applies, it seems to only be in :clown_face: land AKA :us: -

Nah, looks like it’s not only USA.

The WCAG 2.1 in itself is not considered as legislation, but being the most important guidelines for web accessibility, they set the standard for web accessibility legislation in most countries in the world, for example:

  • United States’ ADA and Section 508 accessibility legislation are based on WCAG 2.1
  • Canada’s ACA and AODA accessibility legislation are based on WCAG 2.1
  • The European union’s EAA and EN301549 accessibility legislation are based on WCAG 2.1

I want to make clear that I completely understand the cause of your post and for the most part I’m grateful for this feedback. People with low-sight visibility should make the most of the internet and not be excluded.

Having said that, I do feel an explanation of the background of this project is needed.
We are an enthusiast project with a very small core team and not a well-oiled organization like Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, or Manjaro.

  • The core development team for x86_64 counts three members, plus a couple of community members like @keybreak who help out occasionally.
  • The core ARM dev team counts two members.
  • The mirror handling has one member.
  • Server maintenance, websites, and forum have one member.

We all have busy personal lives, full-time jobs, or full-time students, and between this all, we found time to manage this small project, just for the love of it.
With this in mind, I do hope you understand that I would’ve appreciated it more if the tone of the post was less forceful.

I am highly allergic to this “The project SHOULD do this or MUST do that” tone. You’re post didn’t do that but the thing that put me completely off was the link that warns about meeting compliancy under US law.
This project operates technically speaking under the Dutch flag, as in The Netherlands with Dutch and EU laws, so don’t throw this aggressive American tone at me, let alone try to hit me with the American lawbook because as a Dutch citizen with a Dutch FOSS project, this makes no sense.

This does not mean I’m dismissing your ideas, because in the end they are valuable feedback and I will look into it if I feel like it and have the time to do so.


Having now read through this the popup image saying that “ is not compliant and at risk of legal action” is :cow: :poop: But threatening to sue someone seems to be standard practice in :us: I’ll leave it to you to decide whether that’s a cornerstone of fascism :person_shrugging:


Well…One could say that this popup of given accessibility website was extremely misleading, poorly worded fear-mongering one (not very accessible of them huh?! :rofl: ).

If that’s the case - then i guess it’s not as insane as what i’ve read, which is “are you sure you don’t want to fix that, coz we might sue you!!!” - now that’s definitely fascism in my book, meaning “either you do what we told you to, OR ELSE”.

omg… caring about accessibility and inclusiveness is everything but fascist…

Haven’t i been accessible enough in my non-native english speak?
I thought i’ve been very clear in delineation of two things:

  • Caring about accessibility
  • Forcing legal action if you don’t

Please read first.

P.S. Although as @r0ckhopper pointed out, it might be just very unfortunate wording in their popup window, but i’m still not 100% sure how to interpret it, coz the whole idea smells fishy.

Okay, everyone, stop this futile discussion because it is going off-topic and heading to derail. That is not necessary, I know you’re better than this.

I am not seeing this (no pun intended). It is well known that I have sight issues. Looks fine to me, except for the top banner:

What truely pisses me off, is the size of the text of the tabs in all browsers, I use vimium to switch tabs, mostly. I rotate through different browsers, I change when something frustrates me!!!

1 Like

I only see a Right now, you’re not compliant with accessibility law, and a massive audience can’t access your website. I do not take it as a threatening to sue, in the same way I would not take a reminder that there are traffic rules to respect when driving as threatening to sue.

I also noticed the page uses a flag value that can be used to select a “region.” I used and I get links that are appropriate for the European Union.

Thanks for the reply. I had no idea this post would blow up like it did. I have no desire to hinder or cause trouble to this ‘endeavour’—which I think is great. I was simply hoping to help others use EOS more (because I do, and I like it).