3 ms·

> "and I don't have resources to add all the voice stuff?" There is no "voice stuff". A lot of enabling accessibility is fixing your non-compliance with HTML s

> "and I don't have resources to add all the voice stuff?" There is no "voice stuff". A lot of enabling accessibility is fixing your non-compliance with HTML standards - always have alt tags on your images and the such. We're not talking about supporting a completely new frontend strictly for blind users, the facilities for accessibility are already in our base web technology, the only demand here is to use them correctly. Compliance isn't free, but to make the argument than this is like overhauling an old building is entirely false.

ishansharma 14y ago
> That could mean websites will be required to include spoken descriptions of photos and text boxes for the blind, as well as captions and transcriptions of multimedia features for the deaf, said Jared Smith, associate director of WebAIM, a nonprofit group that trains and evaluates companies on Web accessibility. This is what I was talking about. I support correct HTML tags and standards anyway. But all the things mentioned above are an overkill. And it's not about small guys only. Imagine YouTube being sued for not having captions over all videos? Why due anyone for this, ask them nicely!
- potatolicious 14y ago
  "Spoken descriptions" doesn't mean you need to record your own voiceovers for your website - you are misunderstanding the complaint. Visually handicapped people already use screen readers that will read website aloud to them. The demand here is to ensure websites are compliant enough with basic HTML spec that said screen readers work. The screen readers I've seen don't do anything crazy - they are even fairly tolerant of bad markup, but they aren't magic. The demand here is for websites to care enough to format properly so screen readers actually work.
  - ishansharma 14y ago
    OK. Thanks for the clarification. Would have helped if original article just talked about screen readers.

ishansharma 14y ago

> That could mean websites will be required to include spoken descriptions of photos and text boxes for the blind, as well as captions and transcriptions of multimedia features for the deaf, said Jared Smith, associate director of WebAIM, a nonprofit group that trains and evaluates companies on Web accessibility. This is what I was talking about. I support correct HTML tags and standards anyway. But all the things mentioned above are an overkill. And it's not about small guys only. Imagine YouTube being sued for not having captions over all videos? Why due anyone for this, ask them nicely!

potatolicious 14y ago
"Spoken descriptions" doesn't mean you need to record your own voiceovers for your website - you are misunderstanding the complaint. Visually handicapped people already use screen readers that will read website aloud to them. The demand here is to ensure websites are compliant enough with basic HTML spec that said screen readers work. The screen readers I've seen don't do anything crazy - they are even fairly tolerant of bad markup, but they aren't magic. The demand here is for websites to care enough to format properly so screen readers actually work.
- ishansharma 14y ago
  OK. Thanks for the clarification. Would have helped if original article just talked about screen readers.