3 ms·
Even more infuriating when you attempt to implement correct usage of links/buttons & get pushback such as "what's control-click? no one does that. non-issue."
by muniom 4y ago
Even more infuriating when you attempt to implement correct usage of links/buttons & get pushback such as "what's control-click? no one does that. non-issue."
- munk-a 4y agoIt's a hard fight to fight, certainly, but a common tactic I've employed to counter this is "Web standards exist for a reason and we don't want our website called out for being inaccessible to the blind community. Additionally - these standards have been revised and refined over decades and I don't feel comfortable subverting some of these rules without considering them all - it may break our compatibility with some browsers."
- wildrhythms 4y agoI can tell you from firsthand experience that the people demanding the wrong implementation do not understand the purpose of web standards, much less care about the rationale for following them. On the front end I have seen unimaginably poor designs be implemented with as little justification as "Our pilot users said the UI 'looks cleaner' to do it this way [the wrong way]" and the management is satisfied with that.
- munk-a 4y agoHence why I harp in on two specific points "You don't want to piss off blind people" and "You don't want cross browser compatibility to suffer" - most technical background managers will hear the second point and have a flashback to IE6 or IE4 and immediately start backpedaling, while non-technical background managers will hear the first point and wonder if AADP will end up suing them. The statement I made is not a genuine expression of the most important reasons - it is a tool to persuade management using cherry picked boogiemen to scare foklks into the right decision... aka a bad faith argument made for the best of reasons.