The state of web accessibility is pretty depressing.
- Standards have been around 20+ years, but 97% of the top 1mil sites fail to meet them.
- Standards are hard to learn but automating accessibility is terrible and makes it worse.
- Standards are still the bare minimum. (cont)
- Standards are the best way to make consistent experiences but this makes non-standard or novel experiences even harder to design for.
- We still largely have a "market driven" approach to accessibility, which means justifying human rights in terms of a business case.
- Veteran folks burn out all the time and new folks have a pretty hard time getting started.
- The veterans who don't burn out are often pretty grumpy and are not kind when they spot the same mistakes happening they've been seeing for 20+ years.
- Accessibility specialization can HURT your pay (Consultant a11y engineer/analyst: 100/hr. Consultant engineer with a different, deep specialty: 200-300/hr).
- Accessibility isn't woven into jobs and therefore the work is often on a contract basis.
- Browsers don't strictly enforce valid semantics
- HTML/JavaScript doesn't require accessible patterns or defaults
- Laws don't strictly enforce standards
- Guidelines have to be discovered and implemented by one's own initiative
- Litigation is slow and favors those in power
- Self-advocacy becomes an exhausting chore with folks often going unheard and given little agency
- Community members making the technology around them (such as open-source projects) more accessible without compensation isn't sustainable
- New tools coming out every day which make it even easier to make new things faster... massively increasing the problem of scale without addressing the decades old accessibility issues that still exist
- Older tools relying on voting, grants, and volunteers to fix issues
Anyway. I'm tired but still here. I hope y'all are too. We certainly need you.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you're using a low contrast/minimalist design, many users won't be able to see what is important! There is a minimum ink you should use in your data to ink ratio:
4.5:1 contrast ratio for text and 3:1 contrast ratio for geometries (non-text).
Speaking of contrast, make important elements even higher contrast. Create a hierarchy using size, boldness, or color contrast to guide the user through each step in your graphic.
Test and validate the whole graphic and all its little components work in harmony.
Exhausting. While this might be a cause for celebration for some, my preliminary audit shows that this is yet again another tool for easily creating inaccessible data experiences.
No SR or keyboard access, no semantic control of marks or their relationship to one another, etc
As just naked DOM stuff, this means that yet again the onus is not on the creator of the library but the consumer to do accessibility. Why do we continue to make it easy to make inaccessible things?
Disappointed because this solves technical barriers for some, but produces many.
Why do big names/groups/companies in this space continue to innovate exclusionary tools, libraries, and resources?
These fast and easy solutions create more accessibility problems than they solve. We are long overdue for accessibility and inclusion in the wide field of data.
After hearing I do accessibility in data science, it is always weird when a researcher or data practitioner says, "how interesting, very cool work."
As if human rights is some kind of curious little subject they hadn't considered? This is projected by law?? They need to do it??
Designers and web engineers tend to know this is important, so the comments are rarely off-putting after I give a talk. They usually attend because they need the skills.
From them I often get, "wow, this is exactly what I was looking for and knew I needed! Thank you!"
But many academics and analysts are so used to compartmentalizing info and literally deleting human consideration from their work that they do not know they are neglecting significant legal precedence.
"Oh how curious that someone would need this 'access' you speak of. Strange!"
Unlearning ableism also includes unlearning self-deprecation.
I used to really loathe myself, but trying to come up with words and terms that weren't ableist made me realize that I actually did not know myself very well at all.
I would catch myself wanting to insult myself after a mistake. The only reasonable thing I could replace an ableist slur with was the truth (which is frustratingly unsatisfying).
*ableist slur towards myself*
Which was replaced by
"I hate myself for messing up because I am not good enough" (still ableist)
Then replaced by
"I am mad at myself for making a mistake and I don't like how it feels to make mistakes" (still not good)