11–20 of 250 posts
But the inability to replicate the experience in full, I think , inhibits catering to that demographic.
I hate the font choice of this article.
Apologies in advance for the poor (attempt at) humour, I don't mean to trivialise a real issue, only to ridicule IE9 users.
In all seriousness it's due to the complexity of catering for certain disabilities each of which require entirely different technical solutions, and some of which depending upon OS and various devices can be seamlessly provided for.
I would say a better question here is why isn't there more standardisation on the technology and approach to better serve the needs of people with a disability.
It's not a purely technological issue either, I've never seen a tender for website or application development with any provision for it. And I've seen a fair few.
Show me a virtual machine that I can test with, that puts me in the shoes of a user w/ a disability, and I'll develop with accessibility in mind. But the inability to replicate the experience in full, I think , inhibits catering to that demographic.
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%.
-Write good, semantic HTML, and use alt tags correctly
-Don't overwrite browser defaults for scrolling, tabbing, etc (even if it's "hot design")
-Don't rely purely on color to convey information
-Use ARIA attributes where you can if you're building an application
Some harder stuff that is really still worth it:
-Send your media out for subtitling/transcription (remarkably inexpensive)
-Actually test your site with some disabled individuals, or at least have a go yourself with the NoCoffee Chrome extension to simulate certain visual difficulties
IE9 isn't a disability? Colour me shocked Apologies in advance for the poor (attempt at) humour, I don't mean to trivialise a real issue, only to ridicule IE9 users. In all seriousness it's due to the complexity of catering for certain disabilities each of which require entirely different technical solutions, and some of which depending upon OS and various devices can be seamlessly provided for. I would say a better…
Show me a virtual machine that I can test with, that puts me in the shoes of a user w/ a disability, and I'll develop with accessibility in mind. But the inability to replicate the experience in full, I think , inhibits catering to that demographic.
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.
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?