Live data from Hacker News

Implementing Web accessibility guidelines for nondisabled users (2016)

journals.sagepub.com

41–42 of 42 posts

Re: Implementing Web accessibility guidelines for nondisabled users (2016)

#41
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a 3rd category of users, the bots, and crawlers/scrapers can greatly benefit from some of those invisible accessibility features...

While this may be true we build (non-API) sites for humans. Just because bad actors may exploit tools for differently abled people doesn't mean it's OK to exclude the innocent to reduce ones costs.

No one suggested that, and not all bots are evil - there's still a number of useful web spiders that webmasters can benefit from, it's not just googlebot out there...

Re: Implementing Web accessibility guidelines for nondisabled users (2016)

#42
post #34

My understanding was that skipping accessibility features was more about cost than anything else.

Not cost of implementation, I don't think. Maybe cost of "lost value of data and advertising they could collect". Do you think it's more expensive to implement a few accessibility features their site had with little effort in the 90s, or to fight a case to the Supreme Court, as in the case of Domino's? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21188092

I doubt it would go to court the vast majority of the time, even for public facing sites, but especially not for internal facing.
Post reply on HN