"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…
How should an interested personal web developer find how their website sounds through a screen reader?
The "Cheap" Web
61–70 of 230 posts
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're hard to find because they're not really linked anywhere. We used to have Web directories arranged by subject headings that tried to be mostly comprehensive and put some serious curation effort into that goal, such as DMOZ.org - but there's no modern equivalent to that. People like to complain about how the whole SEO issue has made search results useless as of late, but that if anything is downstream of the ov…
That's so true, it's almost like a return to the beginning (Yahoo Web Directory). We need to find a way to curate content that scales but in a way that eliminates the incentive for bad actors to try SEO-like approaches to game the process. That feels impossible without a feasible alternative to the ad-based revenue model.
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#63The thing that makes me disagree with proponents of the "smol"/"cheap"/etc Web is their totally misguided insistence on personal webpages as a sui generis medium for self-expression wrt layout and styling. > Until we adopt simple and stable building materials, all websites will continue to look the same. Yeah, big deal. Who cares if websites look the same? Wait, let me put that another way: we should care whether web…
Disagreement exists as to how well this is going for us. (cf., content collapse)
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can have all web sites look the same by setting reader view as default in your browser. It is a great improvement for browsing the web, both on desktop and phone. If somebody invented a "forum view" to make all forums look the same on our browsers, then I think the circle would be complete. It shouldn't be too difficult either, since most run on similar software.
You should learn about the Gemini protocol! It's an alternative to HTTPS that uses a document markup language similar to Markdown instead of HTML, and uses a deliberately simplified, feature-frozen protocol with the explicit goal that anyone should be able to write their own Gemini browser "in a weekend". No scripting or styling support, just documents with links and images in them. Here are some informative webpages…
As I understand it, forum functions are not a feature of the Gemini protocol?
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#65"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…
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#66That comment about a "simple markup language" is interesting - anyone know what OP is referring to? They mentioned they're attempting to build one.
OP here! I've got a few different competing ideas at various stages of development. One idea builds on the programming language I'm building. I am growing more doubtful that it's going to provide the beginner-friendly experience I yearn for. It might be as easy as Elm one day, but that's not good enough for grandma. [1] https://scrapscript.org Another idea is like "markdown, but with a grid model". That one also does…
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#67Simple HTML will do this, so long as a browser that supports that version of HTML and CSS is still around. A static Go binary serving dynamic HTML will do this. I struggle to imagine Python, Ruby, etc being able to accomplish this though. That's to say, I'm not sure that's a good rule or could use some reworking to make it more achievable.
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#68> If you are spending less than $1 per hour on your entertainment (podcasts, videos, articles, games, books, etc.), consider finding ways to support creators and the infrastructure that supports them. 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…
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#69the whole cheap/small web thing has me thinking of those people who buy used clothes but think nothing of paying $15 for a coffee at hipsterCafe. something virtue signally about it. maybe it's the "solarpunk philosophy" and the "synthesize serendipity"-ies or quoting steve jobs, one of the biggest a*holes in the history of tech (imo). although i agree strongly with everything here https://potato.cheap/#cheap
This says nothing about the article or topic, but says a lot about your mental baggage.
Re: The "Cheap" Web
#70In a sense OP wants E-ink screens and org/vimwiki/markdown. Styling is where the problem it claims to criticize begins; if you want a truly accessible hypertext book, then you don't need styling, the user should be in charge of this, and the default theme would be whatever easily readable font, black on white, headings 36pt bold, paragraphs 14pt regular, every elements as blocks. Epub, in usage, is actually a cool fo…
The complaints about JS are almost never about the concept of a programming language that runs in your browser, and the upside you describe seems to apply to any language that runs in your browser.