Great seeing that they also have a great website score for Web Accessibility https://wave.webaim.org/report#/https://www.brailleinstitute... which shows a near perfect Web Accessibility Score.
Gives credence that they do take it seriously.
Gives credence that they do take it seriously.
I was thinking about how I'd fix it if it were an issue. A person who doesn't have enough visual acuity to see the distinctness of the glyphs might still want to understand the specific examples of normally-ambiguous glyphs. I came up with this, but it still isn't the best and probably breaks expectations:
<style type="text/css">
.sr-only {
border: 0 !important;
clip: rect(1px, 1px, 1px, 1px) !important;
-webkit-clip-path: inset(50%) !important;
clip-path: inset(50%) !important;
height: 1px !important;
overflow: hidden !important;
margin: -1px !important;
padding: 0 !important;
position: absolute !important;
width: 1px !important;
white-space: nowrap !important;
}
</style>
<figure>
<div>
<span class="sr-only">(distinct glyphs)</span>B8<span class="sr-only">(out of distinct glyphs)</span>
<span aria-hidden="true"> </span>
<span class="sr-only">(distinct glyphs)</span>O0<span class="sr-only">(out of distinct glyphs)</span>
</div>
<figcaption>
<strong>Unambiguous Letterforms<span class="sr-only">:</span></strong><br> Letters have received special care to ensure they’re legible and clear.
</figcaption>
</figure>