21–30 of 230 posts
"Most websites should be compatible with screenreaders", and yet, the first line of text in the website is "♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡"; With the spoken form of: "Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart…
"Most websites should be compatible with screenreaders", and yet, the first line of text in the website is "♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡"; With the spoken form of: "Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart…
I assumed that since my browser's "reader mode" was all good, then screen readers would know how to parse it too.
I do like the heart aesthetic, so how exactly would I make it more accessible?
So I should send them extra money because I keep using it? I bought the discography of a band (0.2665 € / hour according to last.fm so far, obviously falling), should I now set up a monthly donation just because I keep listening? It seems like advocating to only use subscriptions and never owning anything.
This is such a weird take.
I want a FUN standard. I want to make cool looking sites that are relatively scalable based on user hardware.
Alternatives like Gopher and Gemini never really scratched that itch due to how sterile they are.
> Cheap to maintain: Most webpages should work indefinitely without falling over.
YES, holy crap this is what I find most annoying about some of the things I've made recently. Moving between computers, bringing over old projects, and of course dependancies break down and rot. Why can't I start this Gatsby 3 app? Who knows, the install fails. Aggravating.
> Cheap to leave: Opting-out of the web should be painless.
The age of total anonymity on the web is gone I think. Even if you try to be totally anonymous, it's pretty advantageous to have successful online media tied to your name. That makes it pretty hard to opt-out. It's a good ideal to have though!
> Cheap to access: Most websites should be compatible with screenreaders, etc.
Machine readable information is a shallow measure of accessibility. Just because everything is labeled doesn't mean your website is usable. It's a whole interface you need to consider. I would reword as "Most websites should be usable with only a screenreader" or "assistive technology".
> Cheap to participate: Interacting with the web should be possible on a Wii.
... what? An old, outdated, version of Opera?
> Cheap to explore: Exploring the web should be pleasant on 1W of power.
Why are we measuring power draw? Yeah your website can be intense enough to draw more power, but this just seems like an odd metric.
> Cheap to contribute: Making/hosting websites should be easier than scrapbooking.
Yeah, squarespace, wix, wordpress, etc... facebook?
"Most websites should be compatible with screenreaders", and yet, the first line of text in the website is "♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡"; With the spoken form of: "Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart…
Ha! Thanks for catching that! I think that demonstrates how difficult it is to make even a simple website accessible. I assumed that since my browser's "reader mode" was all good, then screen readers would know how to parse it too. I do like the heart aesthetic, so how exactly would I make it more accessible?
"Most websites should be compatible with screenreaders", and yet, the first line of text in the website is "♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡♥♡"; With the spoken form of: "Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart Heart…
Ha! Thanks for catching that! I think that demonstrates how difficult it is to make even a simple website accessible. I assumed that since my browser's "reader mode" was all good, then screen readers would know how to parse it too. I do like the heart aesthetic, so how exactly would I make it more accessible?
You might also want to change the element from a `header` to something else, like a `div` or a `span` or even a `figure` instead. Then put "potato.cheap is home of the... The "Cheap" Web" inside the `header` instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ha! Thanks for catching that! I think that demonstrates how difficult it is to make even a simple website accessible. I assumed that since my browser's "reader mode" was all good, then screen readers would know how to parse it too. I do like the heart aesthetic, so how exactly would I make it more accessible?
role="presentation" will remove it from the a11y tree! Easy fix. Most browsers will notice the characters in the element are not human readable and make some tweaks to make "heartheartheartheartheartheartheartheart" less likely though, even in the current version!
Oh no. Why did you patron Walmart when you could have gone to your local mom&pops. That but for the Web. Petite bourgeoisie sentiment.