So let's talk about something completely unrelated to #Accessibe trying to recast the problem of web accessibility as an unreasonable burden on business.
https://twitter.com/AccessiBe/status/1366322345523216390
The funny thing is when a friend flagged up that #Accessibe blog I just thought it might be a single overly defensive rant. But all the tweets from them suggest a company that knows it has a problem and can't see any way to respond bar lashing out.
Just like physical accessibility, an aftermarket patch to web accessibility is always going to be inferior. Few businesses would hir an architect that doesn't meet the building regs, or not pay their business rates, but they'll happily buy an inaccessible website 1/?
The underlying problem isn't accessibility requirements, it's businesses thinking accessibility doesn't matter, where in fact legal liability makes it business critical. The answer isn't slapping a half assed patch over the top, it's building accessibility in from the ground up.
#Accessibe's 'Chief Vision Officer' asked how many programmers it would take to programme 100k accessible websites. Precisely the same number it took to code them as inaccessible, the issue is the specification issued by those 100k businesses, not the programmers. 2/3
The long term solution is forcing businesses to accept accessibility as no different to the other mandated costs of doing business. What it isn't is slap over the top access suites that fix 80% of the issues without addressing the underlying 100% of the problem 3/3
(And apparently I can't count as I managed to number four tweets 1 to 3!)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
