I have poor vision. This website uses a herd-to-read font and disables pinch-to-zoom (an essential feature) on my iPad.
You'll be pleased to know that the website works absolutely fine in IE9
3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
61–70 of 250 posts
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#62Show 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.
That's a strawman. Making a web site or mobile application accessible is about making it parseable to the accessibility application that the user with disability has installed on their machine. A text to speech app needs to be able to access all the content. Put the right tags on fields. Add alt tags on images. On Android, the Lint tool actually calls these things out. I have no idea what it feels like to use a scree…
> Show me a virtual machine that I can test with
>> Making a web site or mobile application accessible is about making it parseable to the accessibility application that the user with disability has installed on their machine.
He wants access to a VM (or many VMs) with the accessibility application that the user with disability has installed
That doesn't sound like a straw man at all.
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
This happens in the real world too, aka the sidewalk effect. The cutouts in the sidewalk for wheelchairs are now used by everyone else too for their: strollers, bikes, shopping carts, and anyone else who doesn't want to raise their foot an extra couple of inches.
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…
Give a skater a wall, and they will manage to hurt themselves.
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#64I have poor vision. This website uses a herd-to-read font and disables pinch-to-zoom (an essential feature) on my iPad.
Here you go https://www.readability.com/articles/8jmyuikb
The article has horrible fonts.
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#65Probably 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%.
Yes. Off the top of my head, I know of at least four different types of color blindness (from red-green all the way down to total monochromatic vision), total blindness, significant visual impairment (listed separately from blindness due to different accommodations), deafness, significant motor impairment making navigation difficult, and dyslexia (which there are ways of accommodating). Thinking about what it takes t…
You don't have to give up on fancy stuff. You just have to ensure that you don't rely on fancy stuff. Which many of us think is a good idea anyway.
For example, it's fine to use color to convey information as long as that information can also be obtained in other ways. This approach not only makes your stuff usable to the colorblind, but makes it easier for regular folk too.
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
...although you can do a damn good job addressing most of them with a few simple things: -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 o…
Don't rely purely on color to convey information And, conversely, don't submit to the current fad of low-contrast grayscale.
Don't worry, my non-technical management have turned our in house app into a rainbow colored mess. Its ugly, but it does convey information quickly
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#67I 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?
What other metrics would you propose to use? (genuinely curious)
Ethics?
I don't think it's necessarily cost-effective for many places to have accessible toilets. They do it because they've decided it's the right thing do to, or because society has decided this and made a law. Nor do I yield my seat to the elderly because it's somehow cost-effective.
While you and I may consider IE8 a handicap :) it's theoretically possible to upgrade. Barriers to upgrades are usually corporate policy, very old OS versions, or low tech knowledge. All are solvable, to some extent, by action on the users part (or their IT guy). There are exceptions, but it's a tool issue on the user's side, and other tools are generally available.
True disabilities are usually not within the users, or their companies, control. They can't use their own resources (time / money) to fix the problem, or lobby someone else.
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#68I have poor vision. This website uses a herd-to-read font and disables pinch-to-zoom (an essential feature) on my iPad.
I had a similar difficulty with reading the font. I opened the site in lynx and was surprised to discover that it was relatively well structured (easy to read/navigate).
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#69[deleted]
Re: 3% use IE9 and 14% have a disability. Why do we only cater for the former?
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
This happens in the real world too, aka the sidewalk effect. The cutouts in the sidewalk for wheelchairs are now used by everyone else too for their: strollers, bikes, shopping carts, and anyone else who doesn't want to raise their foot an extra couple of inches.
OTOH I've seen pedestrians almost-hit by an out-of-control car that would have been stopped by a proper kerb but instead hit one of those ramps.
Umm... Perhaps address the actual problem here, which would be poor driving?