41–50 of 88 posts
> revealed invisible Interesting that the language of sight is so prevalent that it appears in this very title twice. Echoing other comments, this would be a stronger article if it went into more specifics, but the AI voice precludes that meaningfully.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In distracted driving cases, you're behind the wheel of a vehicle that is capable of harming others; that's why it leads to legal liability. In situations where you are not likely to cause harm, "act[ing] in a reasonable fashion to mitigate risks for yourself and others" does not require anything from you.
All of this is really making my point. Being a pedestrian does not absolve you of all responsibility to mitigate harm. If you cycled at all you’d quickly learn just how entitled and oblivious so many pedestrians act. Cyclists do stupid and dangerous things too. Believe me I am aware. I have to anticipate those too. But, in my experience, nobody acts with more carelessness and selfishness than pedestrians. And I say t…
It is revealing how people with disabilities are treated, just to walk on sidewalk as a deaf person. Most cyclicts assume they have a priority on sidewalks, and will ring bell to enforce it. If you do not jump out of their way in 2 seconds, you get rammed. Cyclists know I can not hear them (I am wearing big noise cancelling headphones). Yet they still insist on their imaginary priority on sidewalks. I was forced to r…
Cycling on sidewalks is illegal here in Canada. Surprised it's being allowed elsewhere
Equally revealing is the audio quality of most CPU screen-readers (regardless of platform). Usually, not far from the crappy first attempts of 30 years ago.
But then, hey, it's a small market, right?
The annoying and counterintuitive part of accessibility work is that there are some architectural decisions that are very hard to undo, don't seem that significant, but will absolutely bite you when you need to implement accessibility. If you decide on a GUI framework which doesn't communicate semantics to the underlying APIs properly, you have no good options. Either you rewrite your entire project in a different fr…
If you know you're going to add accessibility, which ... we have had WCAG since 2005, not knowing that at this point is negligence imho, just make sure you work with frameworks and libraries that won't require overhauling all the things when the PO or management finally get sued into letting devs actually implement it properly. If that kind of functionality takes a backseat to "stunning" and "beaituful" designs that a bunch of people can't use, we take the user out of user interface.
It is revealing how people with disabilities are treated, just to walk on sidewalk as a deaf person. Most cyclicts assume they have a priority on sidewalks, and will ring bell to enforce it. If you do not jump out of their way in 2 seconds, you get rammed. Cyclists know I can not hear them (I am wearing big noise cancelling headphones). Yet they still insist on their imaginary priority on sidewalks. I was forced to r…
Cycling on sidewalks is illegal here in Canada. Surprised it's being allowed elsewhere
Realistically though I think it leads to the same state of play as everywhere else where pedestrians don't much fancy being hit by a faster moving and taller (if not larger) object so dodge out of the way even if they aren't necessarily obligated to.
While the content was interesting, the AI-slop-stench was repelling. Talking about AI (sorry!), perhaps an AI assisted screen reader could remove repetitive elements ( it appends "(read only)" to every. single. field. ) in a smart fashion? Does this already exist? We're seeing AI being used to improve a11y in quite a few places: (Live) transcripts for video conferences, image to text (VQA, visual question answering)…
The "read only" example is such a good illustration of how accessibility problems often aren't one big broken thing, but a bunch of tiny reasonable-seeming decisions stacked together
I've been at this long enough that yes I know that just getting something out the door so we can make money is important.
But this just creates another kind of technical debt that comes back to bite you.
Screen readers almost entirely ignore the visual layer of any UI, and are entirely dependent on the layer that most developers ignore because it's not the visual layer. It's a perfect storm.
It stands to reason that someone who's actually used to using a screen reader should be brought in to verify what you've built actually works well for that target audience.
I'm a fully blind accessibility auditor, remediator and trainer myself, but I wouldn't dare to assume to know how a mobility-impaired user using eyegaze tech fares on a website I've audited.
My eyes don't gaze, so I don't have the context to make those calls.
On that note: I'm looking for work, anyone need me to tell them how their UI is bad for accessibility and fix it for them so they don't get sued later? :P
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Interesting that the language of sight is so prevalent that it appears in this very title twice. Well, it appears once in "invisible", and once in "blind"... but I don't see why "blind" is a surprise when talking about someone blind. There is no reference to sight in "reveal".
Not an immediately explicit one, but to reveal is to unveil [1] is to remove a covering that blocks sight specifically. [1] https://www.etymonline.com/word/reveal