> Accessibility in both Notion and Confluence is absolutely abysmal.
And that's just for people with typical hands and eyes.
Imagine of what it's like for people with disabilities.
And that's just for people with typical hands and eyes.
Imagine of what it's like for people with disabilities.
My exerience with automated tools has been less than stellar. Oh, an image has an alt tag? Congrats, it's accessible, even if that alt tag literally just says "alt tag". I also don't think "simply turn on accessibility features yourself" is a proper solution. It feels like there's a massive difference between me using such tools for the the purpose of testing one website and someone actually relying on such tools.
I'd say for smaller teams it is doubly important to think about this topic early to minimize the overhead of having to fix a whole bunch of bad moves you figure out you've made when someone complains months or even years after you've made them. As for doing this now and again, I think some of the QA firms like APplause and such do offer accessibility testing services and such now, and there's social media like HN, Reddit, Mastodon or, if one must, X, where people can be found who'll be happy to do this provided they can be fairly compensated. Not exactly structural or centraalized but there you have it :)
I'm sitting on a codebase with ~20 HTML ARIA warnings from SvelteKit's lint and frankly don't expect to get to fix them any time soon. I'd like to, but there's always something else to put the effort into. And that's when the framework is trying to nudge me in the correct direction, not active effort!
[1]: So, frankly, not that much: https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/12/21/144066248/l...
[1] https://linuxafterdark.net/linux-after-dark-episode-72/ [2] https://florianbeijers.xyz/
Which tools did you use? I’d argue a human probably also won’t review all your alt tags manually or you could just do it yourself, too. If you have lots of them it might make sense to extract them automatically and pipe them to some language model to generate a score for each of them. Then you can review the ones with the worst scores.
It seems to me that https://wave.webaim.org/ does a good job with ensuring contrast is good, etc., as once I followed all the recommendations things are also readable when using Dev Tools to simulate various vision deficiencies.
The experience was also humbling in an awesome way. I think I still haven't seen anyone navigate the web as fast as this one blind person was capable of, due to the mastery of his tools.
Had the same feeling now three times while watching vision, impaired people using accessibility tools. They can absolutely fly through things much faster than a typical user can. Aside from the general awesomeness that is taking something that most people would consider a disability and turning it into a superpower, it makes me think that I am really missing something by not having that skill.
Has anybody done this before and can offer some advice for how to start, and where to go with it? I am a Linux-only user, which I assume is going to matter for the tooling.
Heh, I guess you are in fact a VI-sion impaired person flying through things when using these editors.
Source: I've been part of an accessibility taskforce at my company for a long time.
Meta comment, but this made me smile. I love the vivid expression, the raw humility, and the philosophically deep but humorous and light hearted commentary on how it feels to have your code evaluated :-)
Usability: This button is hard to understand and/or confusing to operate.
Accessibility: I cannot operate the button AT ALL, cannot perceive it, or can only do so using advanced assistive technology tricks.