31–40 of 250 posts
Probably because those 3% are homogeneous, while the 9% decompose into lots and lots of categories, all with specific needs, and all much smaller than 9%.
This website uses a herd-to-read font and disables pinch-to-zoom (an essential feature) on my iPad.
Where are those numbers from? 3% seems really low. I would guess the IE8 (being the highest version that can run on XP) population is much higher then that, but IE9 was chosen to make the number look better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This happens in the real world too, aka the sidewalk effect. The cutouts in the sidewalk for wheelchairs are now used by everyone else too for their: strollers, bikes, shopping carts, and anyone else who doesn't want to raise their foot an extra couple of inches.
OTOH I've seen pedestrians almost-hit by an out-of-control car that would have been stopped by a proper kerb but instead hit one of those ramps.
(Yes, riding on sidewalks is technically illegal. There are many places where it's much much safer and there are no pedestrians to bother.)
I don't know that I agree that looking at this from a market share perspective is useful. If only 1% of your audience uses screen readers, should you use that fact to decide it's not worth supporting them?
What other metrics would you propose to use? (genuinely curious)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This happens in the real world too, aka the sidewalk effect. The cutouts in the sidewalk for wheelchairs are now used by everyone else too for their: strollers, bikes, shopping carts, and anyone else who doesn't want to raise their foot an extra couple of inches.
OTOH I've seen pedestrians almost-hit by an out-of-control car that would have been stopped by a proper kerb but instead hit one of those ramps.
Your point illustrates the subject line nicely. Very many people have a disability, yet you're suggesting very rare benefits of keeping kerbs that hamper people with disabilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This happens in the real world too, aka the sidewalk effect. The cutouts in the sidewalk for wheelchairs are now used by everyone else too for their: strollers, bikes, shopping carts, and anyone else who doesn't want to raise their foot an extra couple of inches.
OTOH I've seen pedestrians almost-hit by an out-of-control car that would have been stopped by a proper kerb but instead hit one of those ramps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What other metrics would you propose to use? (genuinely curious)
Yes, it's a tough decision what to support. My point is that the percentages of disabled users are often far below what would make financial sense to support, but often there is a need or legal requirement to support them regardless.
Well to be honest I can test my code in IE9 to see if it works. But I have no idea how a disabled person is experiencing my website, I do put all the "alt" attributes etc...but it's hard to imagine it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OTOH I've seen pedestrians almost-hit by an out-of-control car that would have been stopped by a proper kerb but instead hit one of those ramps.
I've seen multiple bicyclists almost hit by in-controls cars because they couldn't ride safely on the sidewalks without those ramps. (Yes, riding on sidewalks is technically illegal. There are many places where it's much much safer and there are no pedestrians to bother.)
That differs by jurisdiction; in many places it's completely legal.