Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WebAssembly Studio

webassembly.studio

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 231 posts

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#101

Post by ddevault »

zamadatix wrote: post #63
ddevault wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users with accessibility needs deserve to be able to use software as much as any of the rest of us do, and we should pride ourselves in making time to address their needs. Try reading your comment from the perspective of someone who is unable to use this software because of the choices you've made. Someday, perhaps sooner than you think, you might find yourself in their shoes. In this case, mwcampbell refers to a spe…

I agree that if we make something we intend for others to use it should aim to be accessible to others. Nobody here is saying others shouldn't be able to use software the problem is software is never complete and for a project like this getting the thing working may reasonably happen before you add ARIA attributes without the cause being enmity to others. I might be missing something, how would it have been easier to…

You don't add ARIA tags to the UI - you use UI elements which are already accessible. You should never, ever make a button out of a div. The JavaScript community needs to grow up and stop chasing shiny things, because they're leaving huge numbers of people behind in their wake.

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#102

Post by pickpuck »

mwcampbell wrote: post #10

The "Create New Project" dialog has serious accessibility problems when used with a screen reader. The buttons are clickable divs, not actual HTML buttons or even marked up with proper ARIA. I haven't yet ventured any further into the app. Given that the app is a WebAssembly development environment, my first guess was that it was built in WebAssembly itself, with a custom UI framework. But in fact, it's plain React,…

> What do we do about this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBcz_bGcHgk

After watching this video from Google, I think the future is web components + AOM[1].

This makes sense to me because:

1) Most web developers are already using frameworks (such as React) which can render web components.

2) We can't expect all web developers to be ARIA/WCAG/ADA experts — they're always going to be trying to write code that quickly/efficiently expresses their intent.

Once we get full buy-in and implementation in all browsers and screen readers, most web developers probably won't be using much anymore.

Instead, they'll be using . The sets up all the appropriate ARIA properties/attributes, can restrict what slot content it accepts, and can present remaining issues as errors in the console.

Perhaps under the hood does indeed include a in its Shadow DOM, or maybe it's a .

Coupled with Houdini and some other emerging standards, I think AOM will finally make web components a viable option for most developers, and can solve the vast majority of accessibility issues we see today.

[1]: https://wicg.github.io/aom/explainer.html#motivating-use-cas...

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#103

Post by rhencke »

wffurr wrote: post #79
zamadatix wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why assume ignorance/difficulty when the reality is not everyone is going to focus on adding/maintaining accessibility when they haven't even built out their beta MIT licensed side project? It'd certainly be nice if everything just automagically worked about accessible UI but we're not there yet (getting anything to automagically work in UI is a pain still). As far as what we can do about it I suppose outside of some…

How hard is it to just use a damn For a button on a web page? Basic HTML already works perfectly in a screen reader with no effort. It requires effort to screw it up.

Perhaps you could open a pull request to fix this.

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#104

Post by imaginenore »

I open the "Hello World" project in C.

I change

    printf("Hello World\n");
to

    printf("Hello Worlds\n");
I build and run, still outputs "Hello World".

I delete main.wasm, build and run again, still outputs "Hello World".

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#105

Post by zamadatix »

ddevault wrote: post #101
zamadatix wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that if we make something we intend for others to use it should aim to be accessible to others. Nobody here is saying others shouldn't be able to use software the problem is software is never complete and for a project like this getting the thing working may reasonably happen before you add ARIA attributes without the cause being enmity to others. I might be missing something, how would it have been easier to…

You don't add ARIA tags to the UI - you use UI elements which are already accessible. You should never, ever make a button out of a div. The JavaScript community needs to grow up and stop chasing shiny things, because they're leaving huge numbers of people behind in their wake.

Bikeshedding about the best approach to making it accessible aside I think we all agree there was no out of the box button with the exact functionality and styling the project needed. Many ways to build such a thing but all of which require someone actually making the software that way as part of the project scope. Difficult? Not really. Priority to implement from day 1 in this project? Well that's what started the conversation I suppose.

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#106

Post by konaraddi »

tomasreimers wrote: post #2

Jokes about the [Birth and Death of JavaScript]( https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death... ) aside, I love the concept of WASM and that we're making the web a more robust compile target. One of the big limitations in my mind is that I still don't know of that many people using it in production at scale. Is there a list, or well known set of examples (other than Figma), who are using WASM in prod…

Additional examples of WebAssembly being used at scale that I haven't seen others mention yet:

Microsoft - https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/garage/wall-of-fame/calc-ts-...

Adobe - https://medium.com/adobetech/acrobat-on-the-web-powered-by-w...

Fastly - https://www.fastly.com/blog/announcing-lucet-fastly-native-w...

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#107

Post by maxgraey »

tomasreimers wrote: post #2

Jokes about the [Birth and Death of JavaScript]( https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death... ) aside, I love the concept of WASM and that we're making the web a more robust compile target. One of the big limitations in my mind is that I still don't know of that many people using it in production at scale. Is there a list, or well known set of examples (other than Figma), who are using WASM in prod…

There site which aggregate prod use cases: https://madewithwebassembly.com/

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#108

Post by maxgraey »

tomasreimers wrote: post #2

Jokes about the [Birth and Death of JavaScript]( https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death... ) aside, I love the concept of WASM and that we're making the web a more robust compile target. One of the big limitations in my mind is that I still don't know of that many people using it in production at scale. Is there a list, or well known set of examples (other than Figma), who are using WASM in prod…

Ruffle - A Flash Player emulator over WebAssembly: https://github.com/ruffle-rs/ruffle

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#109

Post by [deleted] »

clickness wrote: post #78
mwcampbell wrote: post #10

The "Create New Project" dialog has serious accessibility problems when used with a screen reader. The buttons are clickable divs, not actual HTML buttons or even marked up with proper ARIA. I haven't yet ventured any further into the app. Given that the app is a WebAssembly development environment, my first guess was that it was built in WebAssembly itself, with a custom UI framework. But in fact, it's plain React,…

I read your comment as unnecessarily abrasive, self-entitled almost. > "It breaks my heart that when this project was started in 2017, some 20 years after web accessibility advocacy had started in earnest, the developer was still uninformed enough about accessibility that they would create a custom button component with no ARIA support." You're assuming ignorance and malice, when in all actuality this most likely com…

[deleted]

Re: WebAssembly Studio

#110

Post by corytheboyd »

mwcampbell wrote: post #10

The "Create New Project" dialog has serious accessibility problems when used with a screen reader. The buttons are clickable divs, not actual HTML buttons or even marked up with proper ARIA. I haven't yet ventured any further into the app. Given that the app is a WebAssembly development environment, my first guess was that it was built in WebAssembly itself, with a custom UI framework. But in fact, it's plain React,…

I agree that building an accessible internet should be everyone’s goal, but let’s be real here and assign blame correctly.

The openness of the technology and the internet itself is what killed accessibility for the masses.

Point 1: HTML, assuming an at-least-okay following of semantics, should be accessible by default. Add the planes of JS and CSS though and it’s insanely easy to create non-accessible content.

Point 2: There is no education about accessibility tech. I don’t just mean about how to create accessible content, I mean about the devices themselves. I’m speaking for myself, I hardly know anything about these devices to be honest. Without an idea of how they work, it’s that much harder to keep them in mind when making design considerations.

Point 3: It’s insanely easy to create and host content. With such a low barrier of entry you’re going to get more low quality content. In the real world, there are strict requirements for businesses to make themselves accessible. There is no version of that for web content. Well, for the most part, until you “make it” at which point I believe you CAN actually be fined for having inaccessible web content. Take that with a grain of salt I’m recalling from shaky memory of reading HN comments.

So, what do we do about this? Honestly I think the only thing we CAN do is solve the education part. As children we should be required to be exposed to and educated about these amazing technologies that assist people with disabilities. Because all of us should know, not just us people in the software business (though in this case of course, ESPECIALLY people in the software business)

There is no way to fix the technology stack itself. It’s just been dug into such a deep hole. We can try to add things to it to make building accessible content easier... but that will add to the problem of there already being a million and one different ways of doing the same thing (where a couple of them are accessible)

Post reply on HN