@7365admin1/layer-common 3.2.1 → 3.2.2-staging.77

package/utils/theme.test.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,216 @@
+import assert from "node:assert/strict";
+import { test } from "node:test";
+
+import { DARK_THEME, LIGHT_THEME } from "./theme.ts";
+
+/**
+ * The dark theme was shipped once with `primary` chosen for the one place it
+ * was a fill, which left the twenty-six places it is a sentence at 1.80:1.
+ * These are the measurements that would have caught it.
+ *
+ * WCAG 2.1 relative luminance and contrast ratio, nothing else.
+ */
+const luminance = (hex: string): number => {
+  const channels = [0, 2, 4]
+    .map((i) => parseInt(hex.slice(1 + i, 3 + i), 16) / 255)
+    .map((c) => (c <= 0.03928 ? c / 12.92 : Math.pow((c + 0.055) / 1.055, 2.4)));
+
+  return 0.2126 * channels[0] + 0.7152 * channels[1] + 0.0722 * channels[2];
+};
+
+const contrast = (a: string, b: string): number => {
+  const [x, y] = [luminance(a), luminance(b)];
+
+  return (Math.max(x, y) + 0.05) / (Math.min(x, y) + 0.05);
+};
+
+/** `fg` at `alpha` composited over `bg` - an overlay is not its raw value. */
+const over = (fg: string, bg: string, alpha: number): string =>
+  "#" +
+  [0, 2, 4]
+    .map((i) =>
+      Math.round(
+        parseInt(fg.slice(1 + i, 3 + i), 16) * alpha +
+          parseInt(bg.slice(1 + i, 3 + i), 16) * (1 - alpha)
+      )
+        .toString(16)
+        .padStart(2, "0")
+    )
+    .join("");
+
+const WHITE = "#FFFFFF";
+const dark = DARK_THEME.colors;
+const light = LIGHT_THEME.colors;
+
+/** Sanity check on the measuring tape before it is used to judge anything. */
+test("contrast is measured the way WCAG measures it", () => {
+  assert.equal(contrast(WHITE, "#000000").toFixed(2), "21.00");
+  assert.equal(contrast("#777777", WHITE).toFixed(2), "4.48");
+});
+
+test("dark primary is readable as text on the page, a card and a menu", () => {
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(dark.primary, dark.background) >= 4.5,
+    `primary on the page: ${contrast(dark.primary, dark.background).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(dark.primary, dark.surface) >= 4.5,
+    `primary on a card: ${contrast(dark.primary, dark.surface).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(dark.primary, dark["surface-bright"]) >= 4.5,
+    `primary on surface-bright: ${contrast(
+      dark.primary,
+      dark["surface-bright"]
+    ).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+});
+
+test("light primary is readable as text on white", () => {
+  assert.ok(contrast(light.primary, WHITE) >= 4.5);
+  assert.ok(contrast(light["text-primary"], WHITE) >= 4.5);
+});
+
+test("text-primary is readable on the surface each theme puts it on", () => {
+  assert.ok(contrast(dark["text-primary"], dark.background) >= 4.5);
+  assert.ok(contrast(dark["text-primary"], dark.surface) >= 4.5);
+});
+
+/**
+ * The drawer is the reason `primary` was moved in the first place. If someone
+ * points it back at `primary` this fails, because a foreground colour cannot
+ * carry the drawer's label.
+ */
+test("the nav drawer fill carries its own label in both themes", () => {
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(dark["on-brand-surface"], dark["brand-surface"]) >= 4.5,
+    `dark drawer label: ${contrast(
+      dark["on-brand-surface"],
+      dark["brand-surface"]
+    ).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(light["on-brand-surface"], light["brand-surface"]) >= 4.5,
+    `light drawer label: ${contrast(
+      light["on-brand-surface"],
+      light["brand-surface"]
+    ).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+});
+
+/**
+ * The defect this replaced: `brand-surface` was the same deep navy in both
+ * themes, so the drawer was the one panel the theme switch did not reach. A
+ * light-theme surface has to be light, a dark-theme surface has to be dark,
+ * and if the two are ever within 3:1 of each other the switch is invisible on
+ * the drawer again.
+ */
+test("the drawer belongs to its theme, and the switch visibly changes it", () => {
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(light["brand-surface"], WHITE) < 1.5,
+    "the light drawer must be a light surface, not a dark slab on a white page"
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(dark["brand-surface"], dark.background) < 1.5,
+    "the dark drawer must sit with the dark page, not float above it"
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(light["brand-surface"], dark["brand-surface"]) >= 3,
+    `light and dark drawers only ${contrast(
+      light["brand-surface"],
+      dark["brand-surface"]
+    ).toFixed(2)} apart - the switch would look like it does nothing`
+  );
+});
+
+/**
+ * The drawer's fill is deliberately close to the page, so the edge is the
+ * boundary and it is the thing that has to reach 3:1. 0.45 is the value
+ * `NavigationDrawer.vue` sets on itself; the theme-wide `border-opacity` is
+ * left alone.
+ */
+test("the drawer's own edge clears the 3:1 a boundary wants", () => {
+  const edge = (fg: string, bg: string) => over(fg, bg, 0.45);
+
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(edge("#000000", light["brand-surface"]), WHITE) >= 3,
+    `light drawer edge vs page: ${contrast(
+      edge("#000000", light["brand-surface"]),
+      WHITE
+    ).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(edge(WHITE, dark["brand-surface"]), dark.background) >= 3,
+    `dark drawer edge vs page: ${contrast(
+      edge(WHITE, dark["brand-surface"]),
+      dark.background
+    ).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+});
+
+/** The active item is named by colour, so `primary` has to be readable on it. */
+test("the active nav item is readable on the drawer in both themes", () => {
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(light.primary, light["brand-surface"]) >= 4.5,
+    `light: ${contrast(light.primary, light["brand-surface"]).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(dark.primary, dark["brand-surface"]) >= 4.5,
+    `dark: ${contrast(dark.primary, dark["brand-surface"]).toFixed(2)}`
+  );
+});
+
+/**
+ * `v-list-subheader` is the one thing in the drawer that does NOT inherit the
+ * drawer's label colour - Vuetify paints it `on-surface` at medium emphasis.
+ * That is why apps used to hardcode `text-white` on it. It has to work
+ * unaided now, or those hardcodes come back.
+ */
+test("an unstyled subheader is readable on the drawer in both themes", () => {
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(over("#000000", light["brand-surface"], 0.6), light["brand-surface"]) >= 4.5
+  );
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(over(WHITE, dark["brand-surface"], 0.6), dark["brand-surface"]) >= 4.5
+  );
+});
+
+test("primary-button carries a white label in both themes", () => {
+  assert.ok(contrast(WHITE, dark["primary-button"]) >= 4.5);
+  assert.ok(contrast(WHITE, light["primary-button"]) >= 4.5);
+});
+
+/**
+ * `primary` is still a fill in a v-btn, a v-chip, a v-alert and a tab bar. The
+ * comment above `primary` used to claim Vuetify derives black for `on-primary`;
+ * it derives WHITE, and white on this blue is 2.68:1. Nothing measured it, so
+ * it shipped. This is that measurement.
+ */
+test("a filled primary surface carries a readable label in both themes", () => {
+  assert.equal(DARK_THEME.colors["on-primary"], dark.background);
+  assert.ok(contrast(dark["on-primary"], dark.primary) >= 4.5);
+  assert.ok(contrast(WHITE, dark.primary) < 4.5, "white here is the defect");
+
+  // Light derives its own and it passes; measure it rather than assume.
+  assert.ok(contrast(WHITE, light.primary) >= 4.5);
+});
+
+/**
+ * Both themes correct the same two Vuetify defaults, and a value that drifts
+ * apart between them is a bug nobody sees until they flip the switch.
+ */
+test("disabled text clears 4.5:1 on the surface each theme puts it on", () => {
+  assert.equal(LIGHT_THEME.variables["disabled-opacity"], 0.55);
+  assert.equal(DARK_THEME.variables["disabled-opacity"], 0.55);
+  assert.ok(contrast(over("#000000", WHITE, 0.55), WHITE) >= 4.5);
+  assert.ok(
+    contrast(over(WHITE, dark.background, 0.55), dark.background) >= 4.5
+  );
+});
+
+test("the dark divider clears the 3:1 a boundary wants", () => {
+  const border = "#62666a"; // white at 0.35 over the dark page
+
+  assert.equal(DARK_THEME.variables["border-opacity"], 0.35);
+  assert.ok(contrast(border, dark.background) >= 3);
+});

package/utils/theme.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
+/**
+ * THE TWO THEMES THIS PRODUCT SHIPS.
+ *
+ * They live here rather than inline in `plugins/vuetify.ts` so that
+ * `utils/theme.test.ts` can measure them. Every ratio quoted below is WCAG 2.1,
+ * alpha composited against the surface the value actually sits on, and the test
+ * re-measures the ones that matter on every run - this file has already been
+ * got wrong once by moving a colour for one use and forgetting the other.
+ *
+ * `disabled-opacity`: Material's 0.38 measures 2.68:1 on white, below the 4.5:1
+ * a sentence needs, and disabled fields in this product carry sentences people
+ * are expected to read. 0.55 is 4.74:1 on white and 6.21:1 on the dark page -
+ * the same value the camera wall settled on, for the same reason.
+ *
+ * `border-opacity`: 0.12 measures 1.32:1, which is a divider you cannot see.
+ * Dark goes to 0.35 (3.22:1) and carries the boundary properly. Light goes to
+ * 0.26 (1.88:1) - visible, but short of the 3:1 a component boundary wants.
+ * Reaching it on white needs 0.42, which turns every table and card edge into a
+ * mid-grey grid across eleven applications; that is a change somebody should
+ * look at before it ships, not one to slip in behind a contrast fix.
+ */
+
+/**
+ * `primary` IS BOTH A FILL AND A FOREGROUND, AND ONE VALUE CANNOT SERVE BOTH.
+ *
+ * Vuetify emits `.bg-primary` and `.text-primary` from the same token, so the
+ * colour that fills the navigation drawer is also the colour of every
+ * `class="text-primary"` sentence, every `color="primary"` icon, spinner and
+ * text button, and the focused outline on every input. On a dark page those
+ * pull in opposite directions: a fill that carries a white label wants to be
+ * dark, and a foreground that is readable on a dark card wants to be light.
+ * There is no overlap - a value light enough for 4.5:1 text on `surface`
+ * (#1B242F) can carry white at 3.48:1 at the very best.
+ *
+ * So the fill is not `primary` any more. `brand-surface` below is what the
+ * navigation drawer is painted with, and `primary` is free to be a foreground
+ * colour. The foreground uses outnumber the fill uses by roughly an order of
+ * magnitude, which is why the split falls this way round.
+ */
+
+/**
+ * `brand-surface` IS A SURFACE, AND A SURFACE BELONGS TO ITS THEME.
+ *
+ * It was first set to the deep brand navy in BOTH themes, which made the
+ * navigation drawer the one part of the product the theme switch did not
+ * reach: a near-black slab bolted onto a white application in light mode, and
+ * a lighter blue block sitting 1.80:1 off the cards beside it in dark mode. It
+ * belonged to neither.
+ *
+ * It is now a real surface in each theme - a light navy-tinted rail on the
+ * light page, the same `surface` the app bar and the cards use on the dark
+ * page - so the drawer reads as part of the application it is in and the
+ * switch visibly changes it. The brand is carried by the title and by the
+ * active item, which is `primary` in both themes, rather than by painting the
+ * whole rail.
+ *
+ * The drawer is a low-contrast panel against the page by design (1.13:1 light,
+ * 1.19:1 dark, exactly like every other surface in Material), so its edge is
+ * what carries the boundary. `NavigationDrawer.vue` raises `border-opacity` on
+ * itself alone to reach 3:1 there without redrawing every table and card edge
+ * in eleven applications.
+ *
+ * `on-brand-surface` is set explicitly rather than left to Vuetify's black or
+ * white, so the label is the same near-black / near-white the rest of the
+ * theme reads in.
+ */
+export const LIGHT_THEME = {
+  dark: false,
+  colors: {
+    primary: "#042134",
+    /**
+     * The navigation drawer's own fill: a navy-tinted light rail, 1.13:1
+     * against the white page and carried by its own 3.27:1 edge.
+     */
+    "brand-surface": "#EDF1F7",
+    /** The drawer's label colour. On the rail: 15.43:1. */
+    "on-brand-surface": "#0B1B27",
+    /**
+     * Vuetify leaves `warning` (#FB8C00) and `info` (#2196F3) at its stock
+     * values and DERIVES their foreground, and — as with `on-primary` — the
+     * derivation picks WHITE. Measured, that is 2.37:1 on warning and 3.12:1
+     * on info: every filled warning/info chip, alert, button and badge in the
+     * product, including the invitation status chips. Setting the label to the
+     * dark page colour takes them to 8.9:1 and 5.3:1. Same value in both
+     * themes because the two fills are the same in both themes.
+     */
+    "on-warning": "#0E1319",
+    "on-info": "#0E1319",
+    "primary-button": "#1867C0",
+    "text-primary": "#052439",
+  },
+  variables: {
+    "disabled-opacity": 0.55,
+    "border-opacity": 0.26,
+  },
+};
+
+/**
+ * Only the keys that must differ; Vuetify merges the rest from its stock dark.
+ */
+export const DARK_THEME = {
+  dark: true,
+  colors: {
+    /**
+     * Stock dark's #121212 page and #212121 surface measure 1.16:1 apart, so a
+     * card, a dialog and the page behind them were one flat sheet. These are
+     * 1.19:1 - elevation on a dark screen is a genuinely small delta - but they
+     * are tinted towards the brand navy rather than neutral grey, and the
+     * divider opacity above is what actually draws the edges.
+     */
+    background: "#0E1319",
+    surface: "#1B242F",
+    /** Stock dark ships a lavender #ccbfd6 here, which is not our product. */
+    "surface-bright": "#26313E",
+    "surface-light": "#26313E",
+    /**
+     * A FOREGROUND colour, chosen to be read: 6.40:1 on the page, 5.38:1 on a
+     * card, 4.53:1 on the bright surface. Not a new colour - it is the blue the
+     * camera wall already draws its accents in (`--vms-accent`), so the two
+     * dark surfaces in this product now agree on one blue.
+     *
+     * Where it is still used as a fill it needs a foreground, and the claim
+     * that used to sit here - that Vuetify derives black - is wrong. Measured
+     * in a browser, Vuetify picks WHITE, which reads at 2.68:1 on this fill:
+     * every filled primary button, chip, alert and tab bar in dark mode. So
+     * `on-primary` is set explicitly below rather than derived.
+     */
+    primary: "#5B9BE0",
+    /**
+     * The label on a filled `primary` surface. Measured 6.40:1 against
+     * `primary`, against the 2.68:1 Vuetify's own derivation gives. Not a new
+     * colour - it is the dark page `background` above, so a filled button
+     * reads as a hole punched in the page rather than a fifth shade of navy.
+     */
+    "on-primary": "#0E1319",
+    /**
+     * The navigation drawer's own fill. Deliberately the same value as
+     * `surface`: on a dark page the drawer, the app bar and the cards are the
+     * same material, which is what makes the rail read as part of the
+     * application instead of a blue block laid on top of it. The token stays
+     * separate from `surface` so the drawer can be moved on its own later.
+     */
+    "brand-surface": "#1B242F",
+    /** The drawer's label colour. On the rail: 13.21:1. */
+    "on-brand-surface": "#E8ECF1",
+    /** See LIGHT_THEME: Vuetify derives white on these fills, at 2.37:1. */
+    "on-warning": "#0E1319",
+    "on-info": "#0E1319",
+    /**
+     * Dark's stock `error` is the pale #CF6679, and white on it is 3.60:1 —
+     * the light theme's darker #B00020 carries white fine, this one does not.
+     */
+    "on-error": "#0E1319",
+    /** Unchanged on purpose: it already passes in both themes. */
+    "primary-button": "#1867C0",
+    /** #052439 on a dark page measures 1.18:1. This is 15.72:1. */
+    "text-primary": "#E8ECF1",
+  },
+  variables: {
+    "disabled-opacity": 0.55,
+    "border-opacity": 0.35,
+  },
+};