4 ms·

I'm not even arguing if zoom is or not necessary but this kind of thought doesn't make sense for me anywhere else than when a feature can compromise a user devi

I'm not even arguing if zoom is or not necessary but this kind of thought doesn't make sense for me anywhere else than when a feature can compromise a user device. If a website borks its usability/accessibility you as a user can decide not to use it. If it's a public service or a company there will be for sure pressure for it to conform to whatever accessibility standard is deemed appropriate. Developers in those situations will have to do the work they are hired to do. Now saying that I should not as an independent developer customise certain behaviour or appearance in a browser (say scrollbars, or many others) to appease that arbitrary accessibility doesn't make sense. If I can't build a certain app (due to arbitrary constraints that have no security implications) then its accessibility is effectively reduced to 0 isn't it? If I, as an idiot, want to build a website that screen readers won't be able to parse or will spew lines of William Shake-s-pear as image alt tags, isn't that my choice and am I not able already to do so? As such, if I for instance wanted to write a game in a browser where some of these things are detrimental, and just can't because, no, accessibility, what does that net any one? This patronising "we know better everything" is sincerely annoying.

anoncake 5y ago
You can implement whatever you want, just not in a website. Write an app instead. Sure, it may not be available on Apple device because of their restrictions on that matter, but that's a separate issue. It would be nice if web developers could be trusted to only disable zoom when it either does not impact accessibility or when making a website accessible is absolutely not possible. In practice, making an inaccessible website is often more profitable because it's less effort. Also, I've seen a lot of ordinary websites disable zoom for no real reason. Important websites have to be accessible. So if your website would not be accessible anyway, it not existing may not be a gain for anyone but it isn't a big deal either. And in many cases, it is better for a website to not exist that for it to be inaccessible: Market forces, your employer, school, university or state can require you to access a website that is not accessible to you. They cannot do that if it does not exist.
- hnedeotes 5y ago
  > You can implement whatever you want, just not in a website. Write an app instead. I don't want to write an app for it. By your logic websites should be plain text and we should all be learning N frameworks to do things that are way easier to do in a browser, available without having to install black box crap software on our devices. It makes no sense, since you can do plenty of worse things than disabling zoom, in fact the browser allows a whole range of things that are not in the interest of users and they don't do anything to curb those, so your point is basically moot. > In practice, making an inaccessible website is often more profitable because it's less effort. This has no bearing in real accessibility, it's, as plenty of other things, a red herring, since real accessibility is not defined by zooming or changing your scrollbar appearance - as you can confirm by visiting a very large part of the internet. > And in many cases, it is better for a website to not exist that for it to be inaccessible: This is like, your opinion. Which besides being as the saying goes, isn't even backed by any rational argument. Just because you keep saying the same words they don't change reality, unless you're Dumbledore, and you're a character in a book, or a movie, and even then, it only changes the story there, not the story outside of it. All the cases you mention can, and should be dealt with in legal terms - your school, employer, university, or state, are public entities, there can certainly be accessibility guides, references and standards, as there are in a multitude of others things, exactly to regulate that. Your argument is like saying, that paper should not be used to draw, or do origami, or write in other languages because someone might not understand what it is, or what is contained in it. Of course, that's silly. And when it comes to government, schools, and public entities, according to the type of documents, printed and available in paper, they do have to follow a specific ruleset, without impacting what paper can be used for in other situations.
  - anoncake 5y ago
    > I don't want to write an app for it. By your logic websites should be plain text and we should all be learning N frameworks to do things that are way easier to do in a browser, available without having to install black box crap software on our devices. - Web apps don't require less trust than proper ones. Their developers can use dark patterns, abuse your data, etc. - Cross-platform frameworks exist - I have no idea why you think I mind hypertext > This has no bearing in real accessibility, it's, as plenty of other things, a red herring, since real accessibility is not defined by zooming or changing your scrollbar appearance - as you can confirm by visiting a very large part of the internet. Are you seriously claiming zooming is not an accessibility feature? > This is like, your opinion. Which besides being as the saying goes, isn't even backed by any rational argument. Please stop the flaming. > All the cases you mention can, and should be dealt with in legal terms - your school, employer, university, or state, are public entities, there can certainly be accessibility guides, references and standards, as there are in a multitude of others things, exactly to regulate that. Sure. And once there are strict accessibility laws, worldwide, that everyone follows, and all the legacy software has been replaced, we can give developers control over zooming again.

anoncake 5y ago

You can implement whatever you want, just not in a website. Write an app instead. Sure, it may not be available on Apple device because of their restrictions on that matter, but that's a separate issue. It would be nice if web developers could be trusted to only disable zoom when it either does not impact accessibility or when making a website accessible is absolutely not possible. In practice, making an inaccessible website is often more profitable because it's less effort. Also, I've seen a lot of ordinary websites disable zoom for no real reason. Important websites have to be accessible. So if your website would not be accessible anyway, it not existing may not be a gain for anyone but it isn't a big deal either. And in many cases, it is better for a website to not exist that for it to be inaccessible: Market forces, your employer, school, university or state can require you to access a website that is not accessible to you. They cannot do that if it does not exist.

hnedeotes 5y ago
> You can implement whatever you want, just not in a website. Write an app instead. I don't want to write an app for it. By your logic websites should be plain text and we should all be learning N frameworks to do things that are way easier to do in a browser, available without having to install black box crap software on our devices. It makes no sense, since you can do plenty of worse things than disabling zoom, in fact the browser allows a whole range of things that are not in the interest of users and they don't do anything to curb those, so your point is basically moot. > In practice, making an inaccessible website is often more profitable because it's less effort. This has no bearing in real accessibility, it's, as plenty of other things, a red herring, since real accessibility is not defined by zooming or changing your scrollbar appearance - as you can confirm by visiting a very large part of the internet. > And in many cases, it is better for a website to not exist that for it to be inaccessible: This is like, your opinion. Which besides being as the saying goes, isn't even backed by any rational argument. Just because you keep saying the same words they don't change reality, unless you're Dumbledore, and you're a character in a book, or a movie, and even then, it only changes the story there, not the story outside of it. All the cases you mention can, and should be dealt with in legal terms - your school, employer, university, or state, are public entities, there can certainly be accessibility guides, references and standards, as there are in a multitude of others things, exactly to regulate that. Your argument is like saying, that paper should not be used to draw, or do origami, or write in other languages because someone might not understand what it is, or what is contained in it. Of course, that's silly. And when it comes to government, schools, and public entities, according to the type of documents, printed and available in paper, they do have to follow a specific ruleset, without impacting what paper can be used for in other situations.
- anoncake 5y ago
  > I don't want to write an app for it. By your logic websites should be plain text and we should all be learning N frameworks to do things that are way easier to do in a browser, available without having to install black box crap software on our devices. - Web apps don't require less trust than proper ones. Their developers can use dark patterns, abuse your data, etc. - Cross-platform frameworks exist - I have no idea why you think I mind hypertext > This has no bearing in real accessibility, it's, as plenty of other things, a red herring, since real accessibility is not defined by zooming or changing your scrollbar appearance - as you can confirm by visiting a very large part of the internet. Are you seriously claiming zooming is not an accessibility feature? > This is like, your opinion. Which besides being as the saying goes, isn't even backed by any rational argument. Please stop the flaming. > All the cases you mention can, and should be dealt with in legal terms - your school, employer, university, or state, are public entities, there can certainly be accessibility guides, references and standards, as there are in a multitude of others things, exactly to regulate that. Sure. And once there are strict accessibility laws, worldwide, that everyone follows, and all the legacy software has been replaced, we can give developers control over zooming again.