4 ms·
Seeing as it seems (from my experience at least) an old-school, "HTML 3.0" website with no javascript and minimal markup (make sure all pictures get alt text) t
by CJefferson 3y ago
Seeing as it seems (from my experience at least) an old-school, "HTML 3.0" website with no javascript and minimal markup (make sure all pictures get alt text) tend to work very well for accessibility, I personally think governments should just say all websites that are businesses have to either be accessible, or have an accessible version -- and that accessible version should be kept up to date.
You can, and people do, make fairly fancy websites with Javascript that still work well (a blind friend told me Amazon is quite good, for example), but really this is the bare minimum. As a bonus, it will help all of us as we find ourselves getting less physically able as we age, even if we don't need the support right now.
- nosefurhairdo 3y agoBuilding rich web UI that conforms to accessibility guidelines is nontrivial. A single violation of a WCAG 2.1 success criterion is considered a failure to conform. For example, you can fail if any part of your UI doesn't handle reflow correctly on a 1280x1024px resolution at 400% zoom (equivalent to 320x256px). A government mandate requiring corporate-owned websites be made accessible would require a small army of auditors to enforce.
- CJefferson 3y agoThe rules might need tweaking, but honestly I have limited sympathy. There are standards on the building of my house, the gas, the electricity, the plumbing. They all have to be carefully followed. Why should computing, when provided by multi billion dollar businesses, be such a free for all in comparison?