4 ms·

I know it's pretty common in user generated text like comments, titles of the posts, etc. I'm not sure if they are a popular pattern in website content. I wonde

I know it's pretty common in user generated text like comments, titles of the posts, etc. I'm not sure if they are a popular pattern in website content. I wonder if there are any popular websites that actually use this pattern. As it would be super bad for their business from SEO pov.

mlang23 6y ago
User generated content is not part of a websites content? Please elaborate.
- 30minAdayHN 6y ago
  Good call out. I should have better phrased. I see two types of content. Published content and User generated content. Published Content is any content produced by employees who run the website or customers who are hired by the employees to work for them. Here content is controlled and there is some sort of oversight as content gets published and there is responsibility on publishers. Generally there are some monetary incentives to the publishers to do that. User generated content is any thing posted by any user. There are no monetary benefits to the users themselves. Not much oversight. Though there might be community guidelines, they are often not enforced. Consequences of not adhering to the policies might not matter much to the user. From accessibility standpoint, there is not much we can do for the user generated content other than educate them. In the end, it's user's decision whether to adhere or not. In case of published content, website owners have total control on what goes out to begin with. They can proactively enforce accessibility guidelines. For the comment in discussion, my observation is that glyphs are popular for user generated content rather than published content. And from accessibility standpoint, it's an OK trade off.
  - mlang23 6y ago
    I get what you mean. However, I dont agree that "we" cant do anything about user content. Users will use the technology that is provided to them. If the tech providers dont care about accessibility ultimately, they will create tools that make it easy for users to generate inaccessible content. So I dont agree. It is not something the industry can do nothing about. It is simply something the industry is systematically forgetting about in at least the last 10 years.
    - 30minAdayHN 6y ago
      I totally agree that if made a priority industry can definitely create better tech that leads to more accessible content. But as you said, for an industry that systematically ignored the problem for 10yrs, I would rather push them for generation of better accessible published content than user content and hence i said it’s a trade off. I also wonder how ML can potentially help here. For example, for images without alts, automatically populate them.

mlang23 6y ago

User generated content is not part of a websites content? Please elaborate.

30minAdayHN 6y ago
Good call out. I should have better phrased. I see two types of content. Published content and User generated content. Published Content is any content produced by employees who run the website or customers who are hired by the employees to work for them. Here content is controlled and there is some sort of oversight as content gets published and there is responsibility on publishers. Generally there are some monetary incentives to the publishers to do that. User generated content is any thing posted by any user. There are no monetary benefits to the users themselves. Not much oversight. Though there might be community guidelines, they are often not enforced. Consequences of not adhering to the policies might not matter much to the user. From accessibility standpoint, there is not much we can do for the user generated content other than educate them. In the end, it's user's decision whether to adhere or not. In case of published content, website owners have total control on what goes out to begin with. They can proactively enforce accessibility guidelines. For the comment in discussion, my observation is that glyphs are popular for user generated content rather than published content. And from accessibility standpoint, it's an OK trade off.
- mlang23 6y ago
  I get what you mean. However, I dont agree that "we" cant do anything about user content. Users will use the technology that is provided to them. If the tech providers dont care about accessibility ultimately, they will create tools that make it easy for users to generate inaccessible content. So I dont agree. It is not something the industry can do nothing about. It is simply something the industry is systematically forgetting about in at least the last 10 years.
  - 30minAdayHN 6y ago
    I totally agree that if made a priority industry can definitely create better tech that leads to more accessible content. But as you said, for an industry that systematically ignored the problem for 10yrs, I would rather push them for generation of better accessible published content than user content and hence i said it’s a trade off. I also wonder how ML can potentially help here. For example, for images without alts, automatically populate them.