31–40 of 159 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of those are accessibility issues, they're product design choices.
Accessibility is a product design choice. Accessibility isn't just for the disabled, it affects everyone.
The point was that having a landing page that goes to a Sign Up option before showing all the content is not necessarily an accessibility issue, it's a decision made to drive sign ups and therefore revenue and it's not something the a11y team would've been in charge of. Blind people can still navigate the page provided the components are accessible in the same way sighted users can.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure why this is downvoted, it's a pretty obvious assessment.
It could be accurate, but it's hard to imagine having this little empathy.
Accessibility on Quantbase is abysmal. Maybe bring that up before telling others how to handle it on their stuff?
Score of 53 out of 100 with 4 critical issues, knocking it out of compliance.
https://www.accessibilitychecker.org/audit/?website=https%3A...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a11y is no more a "nice to have" than a wheelchair ramp. It's a legal and moral requirement. This is like saying security is "nice to have"
There are no moral requirements
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the ADA specifically, but American courts have generally held that large commercial websites do need to be accessible in terms of the ADA. That's aside from the cruelty of diminishing accessibility on a major social platform, slowly cutting off disabled users, despite its cost likely being a rounding error in the greater scheme of things.
There was a court case in recent memory mandating that universities caption any video they publish. It was specifically relying on the ADA. https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahkim/2019/11/29/harvard-uni... "In the United States alone, approximately 50 million people are considered deaf or hard of hearing. The failure to provide appropriate accommodations to this community is a violation of the Americans with Disabiliti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The current website already supports accessibility. The team being fired or laid off doesn't mean that suddenly goes away.
That's why I said diminishing accessibility and slowly cutting off disabled users. This obviously isn't going to happen immediately, but every new feature will be less accessible and maybe even not provide accommodations entirely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Certainly not for "free speech" that costs $8/month.
AFAIK that’s a misconstrual. Having a “verified” blue checkmark will cost $8 a month, but using Twitter and saying whatever you want on it will still be free.