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

3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

fionatg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 250 posts

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#231

Post by im3w1l »

Isofarro wrote: post #182
nailer wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of skaters and kids on scooters and have become injured thanks to the those rubber stoppers. You can't rely on them if you're disabled, because they're not on every corner. I've also read that it's cheaper to give disabled people a full time minder than to run these programmes. Solutions that start with 'let's change the world' never, ever work. Let's fix screenreaders. And help the blind by analysing what;'s i…

"Solutions that start with 'let's change the world' never, ever work. Let's fix screenreaders. And help the blind by analysing what;'s in front of them, rather than changing it." It's not screenreaders that are the problem, its the quality of the content (in terms of structure, perceivability, operability, usability and robustness). In short, GIGO. The garbage input is where the fix is needed, not the tool that's att…

Responding to your 3rd paragraph. I think you are too pessimistic. Solving the general case probably is that hard. But working "well enough", "most of the time" probably isn't. I'd think a clever selection of hacks, combined with a knowledge of the most common patterns in which websites are designed go a very long way.

Afaik googlebot does things like this already. It detects hidden elements to prevent blackhat seo for instance.

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#233

Post by aidenn0 »

pestaa wrote: post #210
aidenn0 wrote: post #206

Because people with disabilities are used to not gettting what they want.

So it makes perfect sense to continue not giving them what they want?

The question was "Why do only cater to the former?" not whether or not it makes sense to do so. In fact the very question strongly implies that it doesn't make sense.

Non disabled persons using older browsers are used to things "just working" for them, so they have a lot of energy to expend being pissed off when things don't work.

Disabled persons are confronted with lots of things not "just working" for them, so the energy of being pissed off gets more spread out.

In the general case, this causes a positive feedback loop where minor issues for people without major problems get fixed, while more significant issues for people with even worse problems don't get fixed.

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#234

Post by lilsunnybee »

yawgmoth wrote: post #104

The fact that her site uses a hard-to-read font has nothing to do with her point. The merits of each should be considered individually.

But then how is anyone supposed to feel smug and unthreatened if they can't laugh at and disqualify her argument over some irrelevent bullshit?

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#235

Post by lilsunnybee »

fnbr wrote: post #115

Wow, that's a terrible font, especially for an article talking about catering to those with disabilities. I found it hard to read, and I have perfect vision.

Nothing to say about the article just the fucking font its printed in?

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#236

Post by mreiland »

EpicEng wrote: post #227
shutupalready wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

joblessjunkie means the original article's site. Pinch-to-zoom works fine on HackerNews on an iPad, and the HackerNews font is nothing unusual. Regarding HN being too wide, why don't you narrow your browser window? Personally, I like the fact the traditional web design in which HN adjusts the line to screen width rather than imposing a width.

Eight,I'm sure I'm going to resize my browser just to read HN and then maximize it again when I navigate away to a site which uses a sane content width. No need to be an apologist. I like the content here,but the design in many respects,is awful (expired links anyone?).

I have no issues whatsoever with the width/layout issues, but the expires links... yes.

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#237

Post by mreiland »

leorocky wrote: post #88
shutupalready wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

joblessjunkie means the original article's site. Pinch-to-zoom works fine on HackerNews on an iPad, and the HackerNews font is nothing unusual. Regarding HN being too wide, why don't you narrow your browser window? Personally, I like the fact the traditional web design in which HN adjusts the line to screen width rather than imposing a width.

> Regarding HN being too wide, why don't you narrow your browser window? Narrow my browser window because this one site makes it difficult to read? I could do that, or I could just use a content script and leave my browser at the width I prefer. I maximize my browser for distraction free reading.

Can you explain to me the issue with it being too wide?

I may not be understanding it, because I just maximized the window and I don't see any issue, really.

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#238

Post by mreiland »

thefreeman wrote: post #163
shutupalready wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

joblessjunkie means the original article's site. Pinch-to-zoom works fine on HackerNews on an iPad, and the HackerNews font is nothing unusual. Regarding HN being too wide, why don't you narrow your browser window? Personally, I like the fact the traditional web design in which HN adjusts the line to screen width rather than imposing a width.

Personally, I like the fact the traditional web design in which HN adjusts the line to screen width rather than imposing a width. Its just that it ruins the experience on mobile devices because you can't resize the window and zooming doesn't reflow the text. for what it's worth, I don't really have a problem with it. They provide an API and there are like 90 billion ycombinator mobile apps to choose from which do a b…

ah, it's a mobile issue. I strictly use a desktop for HN and was confused about why people were complaining.

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#239

Post by mreiland »

bunderbunder wrote: post #60
colanderman wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

In most cases you're more likely to be hit by a car if you're riding on the sidewalk. Last numbers I suggest that your risk of being killed by a car is about twice as high when you're on the sidewalk. The reason is simple: Bikes move quickly, and bikes on the sidewalk are much harder for motorists to see than bikes on the street. That makes it extremely difficult - sometimes impossible - for drivers to see or anticip…

lmao, "use-of-space conflict"

Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?

#240

Post by pascalo »

methodover wrote: post #192

I work at a small startup with a somewhat large user base (1M weekly users or so) and every time I bring up accessibility issues I get shot down. Just the other day I was told "You talk more about accessibility than anyone I've ever met." Well, yeah, because apparently no one fucking cares. Including you. (I said this not out-loud, to be clear.) Thing is, making accessible sites is usually not super difficult. It's m…

Could you wrap the improvements you're trying to make as something other than accessibility? Making every dynamic control keyboard friendly for example could be sold to the business owner as "for power users", then go, refactor the bit with proper aria labels and you're 75% there?
Post reply on HN