3 ms·

I hate it when y’all give made up stats, like “99% of all websites should not be an SPA” or in this case, “Vast majority of websites do not need accessibility f

• bsder 6y ago
  What this article pointed out is that accessibility imposes a cost on programmers. At that point, a programmer is entitled to ask whether that cost is justified and whether he wishes to pay it. This plays out in other areas. UC Berkeley was told that it needed to make public videos "accessible". That was going to be expensive, so they decided to simply remove the videos. This, of course, benefited no one because now nobody else could make the videos accessible either. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/06/u-california-berkeley-delete-publicly-available-educational-content https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/06/u-california-... Accessibility isn't free and I wish people would quit acting like it is. We, as a society, choose to impose that burden because, on the balance, everyone needs accessibility to some degree as they age or if they get injured. However, if nobody is willing to pay for it, don't be surprised if some people decide, like Berkeley, that exiting the arena is the better choice. At which point, everybody loses.