Archive index

A11y Slackers Gitter Channel Archive 27th of July 2017

What fresh hell is THIS now? - Patrick Lauke
  1. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 08:21

    [morgan] Hi all, I'm really newbie to a11y.
    Earlier on I had this discussion with a colleague regarding a11y and pointing the fact that even if the percentage of users needing assistive technologies to browse our application is low, it shouldn't be a reason to not take the time to implement/refactor with a11y in mind.
    To this he pointed that this is a bit contradictory with a debate we had a few days ago in regards dropping support for IE9 and IE10, because of usage under 1%.
    I felt a bit stupid I must admit. I could not say something more that we have a little prompt that leads to Browser Update and instructions/reason why to update, and that even the manufacturer itself does not support it, so why should we.

    I would be interested to have your thoughts on this parallel? Thank you in advance

  2. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 08:57
    [tiffy23] @morgan I would say that updating a browser is easy, but there's no way to update your sight or motoric skills as easily.
  3. [morgan] oh thank you, pretty straightforward
  4. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 09:05
    [tiffy23] You're welcome! I'm looking forward to other comments, since that's a topic that comes up now and then in meetings with clients and it's good to hear other thoughts!
  5. [tink] @morgan a couple of thoughts come to mind...
  6. [tink] a) People using IE9 is a diminishing audience, and catering to IE9 etc. risks reducing functionality for all users.
  7. [tink] b) There are a lot more people who benefit from accessibility in the world than there are IE9 users, and that number is growing (because of the aging population if nothing else).
  8. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 09:11
    [tink] @tiffy23 makes an excellent point too... People can choose not to use IE (for the most part), they can't choose not to be blind/mobility impaired/whatever.
  9. [morgan] @tink Thank you for this great feeback :)
  10. [tink] You're welcome :)
  11. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 09:46
    [coupey] There are also a lot of examples of design decisions that improve accessibility actually making something better and simpler to use for everybody.
  12. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 12:30
    [donnabungard] @morgan - this effects ~ 20% of the US ADULT population alone - ~53 million people. If you were to do a quick google search you'd find that's nearly as many people as live in the California and New York. Would the people you're looking to convince ignore those primary markets?
    Keep in mind, its not only the disabled who need considerations. There are temporary disabilities (ever break your wrist? Ever have poor site after a poorly aimed baseball or something... these effect your UX on a site).
    In general (and I wont go on a full soapbox here) we need to start thinking of accessibility as a UX issue and not a disability issue.
  13. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 12:38
    [kivi] As a UX practitioner I couldn't agree more.
  14. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 12:51
    [donnabungard] LOL I'm a digital strategist who just keeps talking and talking about it! ;)
  15. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 12:59
    [morgan] @donnabungard and @kivi Thank you for your valuable input :)
  16. LauraOU
    @LauraOU
    Jul 27 13:50
    I like Marcy's "design for future you" also http://marcysutton.github.io/a11y-testing-with-angular/#/5
  17. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 16:03
    [virtualalex] What is the best practice for handling data visualization images?
  18. [virtualalex] I am thinking explaining the data and the main points the data shows in detail in a descriptive paragraph makes the most sense
  19. [virtualalex] but then what is the image alt-text?
  20. [donnabungard] Maybe explaining that its an image the other paragraph is referencing??
  21. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 16:10
    [virtualalex] yeah I was thinking that too
  22. [virtualalex] like “A data visualization of XYZ, detailed explanation provided below”
  23. [virtualalex] and then have a detailed explanation in main content
  24. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 16:16
    [dickson] Anyone knows what the best way to deal with soft hyphenation is (unicode 173)? I'm seeting this in the CTAN archive for LaTeX packages, which makes the page near unreadable with screen readers. Tested with firefox and IE with NVDA. https://ctan.org/pkg/setspace
  25. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 16:33
    [jhetrick] @dickson I don’t have that browser/tool combo handy at the moment — how are the hyphens being read (or not)?
  26. [jhetrick] just tried with VoiceOver real quick and didn’t hear anything unusual
  27. Schalk Neethling
    @schalkneethling
    Jul 27 17:57
    Hey All, looking at working with an automated tool for basic accessibility testing of websites/web-apps - https://github.com/dequelabs/axe-core Looks like it might be really good but, wanted to get some suggestions from you all.
  28. Thank you in advance
  29. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 18:02
    [ugi] Tenon is pretty good. (tenon.io) It is not free but provides a great interface and API for testing and reporting.
  30. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 18:16
    [johnbhartley] I've also used https://github.com/pa11y/pa11y it's not as robust as tenon or as frequently maintained, but gets the job done in most cases
  31. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 18:25
    [donnabungard] As I understand it, automated options only pick up 20-30% of issues. I wish there was a list of how much each tool could catch to help rate them.
  32. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 18:30
    [garcialo] @donnabungard I’ve done some of this for a coupe of automated testing tools, but only for success criteria coverage…I’m going to be doing some more detailed analysis for a talk I’m working on
  33. [donnabungard] Oh I'd love to see your results!
  34. [vavroom] @donnabungard there was a test done by the UK gov about that. https://accessibility.blog.gov.uk/2017/02/24/what-we-found-when-we-tested-tools-on-the-worlds-least-accessible-webpage/
  35. [donnabungard] (and a recording of your talk!)
  36. [garcialo] http://www.garcialo.com/tools/toolsdata
  37. [donnabungard] WOW = awesome - thank you for sharing!
  38. [garcialo] that’s what I have now. I had put it together for a tools talk I did at CSUN last year (2016)
  39. [garcialo] the data in those tables are only current as of early last year…but the tools aren’t checking drastically different now than they were then
  40. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 18:35
    [garcialo] and those tables overstate what kind of coverage you can get from automated testing since while a tool might have a single 1.1.1 check, it might not cover every 1.1.1 check you would consider in a formal audit
  41. [karlgroves] http://www.karlgroves.com/2012/09/15/accessibility-testing-what-can-be-tested-and-how/
  42. [karlgroves] I think it is extremely important to also keep in mind that no tool on the market can provide complete coverage for any of WCAG’s SCs.
  43. [karlgroves] Not. One. SC. Can. Be. Tested. Completely. With. An. Automated. Tool.
  44. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 18:52
    [cmegown] you'd really get the point across if you used :clap: between each word
  45. [cmegown] or maybe i've just been on twitter too much lately
  46. Schalk Neethling
    @schalkneethling
    Jul 27 18:53
    Thanks for the feedback all. I definitely do not expect the tool to catch all of the things, but some is a good start.
  47. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 19:42
    [ghanek] Equally important is knowing what gaps exist for a given tool. Thanks for sharing, Luis!
  48. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Jul 27 20:01
    [garcialo] @ghanek That’s pretty much what my talk is about
  49. [ghanek] :raised_hands::skin-tone-4: