5 ms·
I see a different "shape". To me it looks like the same accessibility song and dance that happens every time a GUI library is the topic.
by stagger87 3y ago
I see a different "shape". To me it looks like the same accessibility song and dance that happens every time a GUI library is the topic.
- mort96 3y agoIs accessibility not a worthwhile concern?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- stagger87 3y agoWhat answer are you expecting? This question is borderline flame bait.
- mort96 3y agoIt seemed like you were criticizing the "accessibility song and dance that happens every time a GUI library is the topic", as if you think accessibility concerns are over-blown. If that wasn't your intention, I suggest you clarify what you actually mean.
- tom_ 3y agoIt seems this might not be the case for American English, but "song and dance" is only ever dismissive in British English. The implication is that the complaints are a needless distraction, due to the relative insignificance of the topic.
- jakelazaroff 3y agoYes, that’s the case for American English too.
- phkahler 3y agoProbably not for internal custom tools.
- mort96 3y agoI agree, which ... is why jakelazaroff is warning that ImGui is meant for internal custom tools, not tools where things like accessibility is a concern.
- djur 3y agoAccessibility is only not a concern for internal custom tools if you're certain you're not going to hire anybody with a disability that requires those accessibility features. (You shouldn't be certain of this, because it means you're probably breaking the law.)
- mort96 3y agoThis is kind of a kinda ridiculous argument. You're not gonna hire a blind level designer or blind character artist.
- djur 3y agoI don't see any reason you couldn't hire a blind level designer, but sure, there may be some subset of "internal tools" that you can make that assumption for. But the topic wasn't "internal tools for visual artists", and a lot of workplaces have internal tools that are inappropriately and unjustifiably inaccessible.
- jakelazaroff 3y agoAccessibility is one (important) consideration but it's true that tools with a small, known subset of users can afford to ignore some constraints. For example, if you're a small American company, your internal tools might not need to support right-to-left languages.
- radiator 3y agoThis is for the creators to decide. Nobody else has a say, really.
- bigstrat2003 3y agoI wouldn't go that far. But "this lacks accessibility" isn't sufficient reason to rule something out, imo. It's better for a piece of software to exist, without accessibility accommodations, than it is for it to not exist at all.
- djur 3y agoNo, there's a tradeoff. If non-accessible software outcompetes and crowds out accessible software, that degrades the ability of people who need accessible software to use their computers. It is entirely reasonable for people who think that people with disabilities should have equal access to technology to advocate against the development of software without accessibility features.
- meepmorp 3y agoIt's a bit sad that something like an iMessage client for Android gets so many people here passionate about the ethics of access to platforms, but you get downvoted pointing out that certain tools/strategies for building software can leave whole classes of people out of computing due to factors entirely out of their control.
- panzi 3y agoAnd you get downvoted for pointing out that here in Europe you're required by law to make software accessible. (At least in theory, don't know if it's enforced at all.)
- panzi 3y agoWell, here in Europe you can get sued if you provide a non-accessible software. (Games are excluded and a photo editor can of course assume that the user can see etc.)
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jakelazaroff 3y agoIf the topic is a tool that's missing an important feature, then of course people will discuss why that tradeoff has been made.