Archive index

A11y Slackers Gitter Channel Archive 29th of October 2015

What fresh hell is THIS now? - Patrick Lauke
  1. MichielBijl
    Oct 29 00:20
    @zakim-robot thanks for being awesome ;)
  2. MichielBijl
    Oct 29 00:20
    username display is much better.
  3. zakim-robot
    04:25
    [jitendra] Do accessibility experts remember everything on WCAG 2.0 documentation?
  4. garcialo
    04:25
    How do you mean?
  5. garcialo
    04:25
    Like memorizing everything?
  6. zakim-robot
    04:27
    [jitendra] A job post says “Candidate should have Strong knowledge and experience with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0"
  7. zakim-robot
    04:28
    [jitendra] and "Knowledge of disability law including, but not limited to, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)"
  8. garcialo
    04:29
    Ah, well I don't memorize everything.
  9. garcialo
    04:29
    I use WCAG for reference.
  10. zakim-robot
    04:30
    [jitendra] When we can say that we have strong knowledge of “WCAG 2.0"
  11. garcialo
    04:30
    I mean...off the top of my head, if I saw an issue, I would probably know it's a issue without having to look. For most, I'd have to check to see which specific guideline number it's breaking.
  12. garcialo
    04:31
    I would interpret it kind of like I just said for myself. I can know that something is an issue...but I'd need to check (in most cases) to know for sure which guideline.
  13. zakim-robot
    04:31
    [jitendra] But if we already understand it’s an issue for user in general, why do we need to check documentation?
  14. garcialo
    04:32
    Because people will argue with you. Here is a favorite example of mine. 1.4.1 - Use of Color
  15. garcialo
    04:33
    Designer removes default underline from links; there are links in a paragraph. I call it an issue because the contrast of the link isn't at least 3 to 1. They're like..."There isn't any mention of a 3 to 1 ratio."
  16. zakim-robot
    04:34
    [jitendra] ok you mean for example if designer says he don’t see any problem with color contrast then you open W3C documentation and show him that we need to improve it because WCAG says so?
  17. garcialo
    04:34
    So, I'm like...yeah, you're using only color to differentiate a link from regular text. And there is a mention of 3 to 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20150226/G183
  18. garcialo
    04:34
    Pretty much. They need some kind of documented justification for them to believe you sometimes.
  19. zakim-robot
    04:35
    [jitendra] ok
  20. garcialo
    04:35
    When I was at UT Austin, I had a director complain that I was enforcing color contrast at all because it's technically not part of Section 508.
  21. garcialo
    04:35
    So, I pointed to WebAIM and other places online where others "interpret" Section 508 to mean having sufficient contrast.
  22. garcialo
    04:36
    Basically, it's being able to back up what you're saying with something more than your own opinion.
  23. garcialo
    04:37
    Of course, I don't know what the potential employer means, but I'd answer any questions about my knowledge in a similar way. I know it and can back it up...sometimes by memory, but even then I'd double check to be certain.
  24. zakim-robot
    04:38
    [jitendra] So we don’t have prove the point practically, we can only give our opinion backed by guideline
  25. garcialo
    04:39
    You can prove it practically; in fact I'd say that's more effective for some people than just pointing to a rule.
  26. LjWatson
    04:39
    @jitendra Speaking for myself, I most definitely don't remember everything in WCAG 2.0.
  27. garcialo
    04:39
    But you will have people that will question you. Like in my first example, when I'm telling them straight up that they're using ONLY color to differentiate, they're wanting proof.
  28. LjWatson
    04:40
    There is something like 600+ print pages of content involved in WCAG 2.0.
  29. garcialo @garcialo nods.
  30. zakim-robot
    04:42
    [jitendra] @ljwatson: So if we understand that sense of Accessibility and know important points of where designer and developer usually makes mistakes, we can apply to a role which demands strong experience in WCAG 2.0
  31. LjWatson
    04:44
    @jitendra "strong knowledge" is a subjective term.
  32. LjWatson
    04:46
    But I'd expect someone applying for an accessibility job to be able to discuss the four principles and all the guidelines, plus be able to describe some common techniques for meeting most Success Criteria.
  33. LjWatson
    04:47
    I wouldn't expect them to remember the exact number of each Success Criteria, and certainly not all of the success techniques or failures for each Success Criteria.
  34. LjWatson
    04:47
    But that's just my take on things of course :)
  35. zakim-robot
    04:50
    [jitendra] Thanks
  36. garcialo
    04:50
    I think @LjWatson and I are saying pretty much the same thing.
  37. LjWatson
    04:51
    @garcialo Yup, think we are.
  38. zakim-robot
    04:52
    [jitendra] Can we people in this group sometime have audio chat on google hangout to discuss various topics?
  39. LjWatson
    04:54
    @jitendra Sure. Anyone could go ahead and organise that.
  40. zakim-robot
    08:47
    [jitendra] Taking an interview. asked to an interviewee how good r in html
  41. zakim-robot
    08:47
    [jitendra] very good - he replied
  42. zakim-robot
    08:48
    [jitendra] do u know what is web accessibility - I asked
  43. zakim-robot
    08:48
    [jitendra] No. - He replied
  44. MichielBijl
    08:53
    State of the Web™
  45. zakim-robot
    09:04
    [jitendra] I asked what is doctype
  46. MichielBijl
    09:13
    Recall someone here asking about system fonts
  47. MichielBijl
    09:14
    CSS Fonts Module Level 4 now has system as a font-family value :D
  48. MichielBijl
    09:14
    https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#system-generic-font
  49. MichielBijl
    09:20
    @jitendra, as long as he/she didn't answer “some sort of Word document?” it can't be that bad ;)
  50. zakim-robot
    09:22
    [jitendra] he replied - doctype is required for SEO
  51. zakim-robot
    09:22
    [jitendra] so google can scan our pages
  52. MichielBijl
    09:24
    It isn't totally wrong. Not totally correct either.
  53. MichielBijl
    09:25
    Where is this interview at?
  54. zakim-robot
    09:30
    [jitendra] at my company
  55. zakim-robot
    09:30
    [jitendra] Is doctype really needed for SEO, I didn’t know that
  56. MichielBijl
    09:30
    Cool, so you're the host?
  57. zakim-robot
    09:30
    [jitendra] yes
  58. MichielBijl
    09:30
    Nice going!
  59. MichielBijl
    09:31
    Uhm, well, I'm not SEO expert, but I'd guess search engines need a doctype just as much as a browser.
  60. zakim-robot
    09:38
    [jitendra] After spending 6 year in web development i would expect person should have some idea about Web Accessibility.
  61. zakim-robot
    09:39
    [jitendra] or I could be wrong, i should not assume this.
  62. MichielBijl
    09:53
    Took me 8 years before I had a basic understanding of web accessibility.
  63. MichielBijl
    09:54
    What I mean is that it took 8 years before I discovered web accessibility.
  64. zakim-robot
    10:12
    [jitendra] I discovred in 4 year
  65. zakim-robot
    10:12
    [jitendra] in 2009-10
  66. MichielBijl
    10:16
    I think for me the crucial point came after @Heydon's talk at CSS Day.
  67. MichielBijl
    10:17
    I was sort of curious before that, but het got my attention.
  68. MichielBijl
    10:18
    But don't tell him that, because he'll go all British and polite and tell you it was nothing.
  69. MichielBijl
    10:19
    That talk was in 2014 btw.
  70. MichielBijl
    10:25
    And guess what? You can watch that very talk here: https://vimeo.com/101718785
  71. powrsurg
    13:21
    @jitendra : Googlebot actually renders a version of the page when it ranks things. It's not like the old days where you should block CSS and JS from a web crawler. Having a doctype is only more helpful because it turns most sensible aspects of web design on (otherwise you're left with a rendering similar to IE5.5).
  72. powrsurg
    13:22
    You need a doctype for a competent design/developer to make a site that doesn't suck. Which is required for SEO
  73. StommePoes
    13:35
    That's maybe kinda stretching it (reason doctypes are needed for SEO), but as with almost all things in SEO, so much is invented, guessed and supposed (does Google do this? Does google do that? Could this make me lose <gollum>precious precious</gollum> Google juice? that I guess no answer can ever be completely wrong unless the Googles really did say something specifically contrary to it :P
  74. StommePoes
    13:36
    I can't remember when I discovered web accessibility. I do remember some of my earliest books (Javascript Anthology by Sitepoint for example) mentioning "screen readers" and they were mysterious black boxes that nobody seemed to know much about.
  75. StommePoes
    13:36
    this was like 2007
  76. powrsurg
    13:42
    I always kinda cared about accessibility. I just hate seeing people facing hardships that they shouldn't. We had someone at my college back in the early 2000's talking WAI (I even still have the card in my wallet from it to this day, though it is pretty beaten up). I would implement ARIA things in our automated software at work that I knew about, but I didn't do much hardcore testing in it. It was just a "I know this is how things should be but I can't keep up with them" thing. A small mom and pop shop wouldn't grasp why their videos would need transcripts, or why their color combination didn't work well, or things like that.
  77. powrsurg
    13:43
    Recently I switched jobs to a place I KNOW accessibility needs to be enforced and we weren't doing a good enough job doing it so I've been pushing it hard. No one is really resisting, but it is hard to get things all at once
  78. powrsurg
    13:45
    I think following Molly Holzschlag or Opera's blogs were where I first learned of ARIA
  79. MichielBijl
    14:16
    Compared to your stories mine is pretty uninspiring :p
  80. zakim-robot
    14:24
    [callumacrae] I'm still on my first year of full-time web development (probably almost exactly a year now), and "discovered" accessibility probably four months ago now
  81. garcialo
    14:25
    Congratulations on being the local a11y expert!
  82. stevefaulkner
    14:32

    Took me 8 years before I had a basic understanding of web accessibility.

    has been my job for 15 years now, still have no idea

  83. StommePoes
    14:33
    It's now like my official job title and I'm like no wait what
  84. StommePoes
    14:34
    I was sent some Angular to see "is this accessible" and I'm like, Angu... wut... no idea.
  85. StommePoes
    14:35
    But... I know just enough to screw everything up, and hope to be spreading the sickness among all sorts of developers in the near future. Maybe with Michiel. We'll do a talk, he can be good cop, I'll be annoying whiny cop
  86. MichielBijl
    14:47

    Took me 8 years before I had a basic understanding of web accessibility.
    has been my job for 15 years now, still have no idea

    That's why I said basic :P

  87. MichielBijl
    14:48
    @StommePoes Sounds like plan!
  88. MichielBijl @MichielBijl cues the A-Team theme song
  89. MichielBijl
    14:49
    And Steve could have a sugar and crocodile costume
  90. MichielBijl
    14:49
    sigar*
  91. MichielBijl
    14:49
    We'd be the Accessibility Team!
  92. zakim-robot
    14:50
    [car] Let us know when the talk is! ;)
  93. MichielBijl
    14:50
    If you have a problem - if no one else can help - and if you're on Twitter or Gitter - maybe you can hire: The A-Team.
  94. MichielBijl
    15:04
    Here is our logo: http://dir.agosto.nl/accessibility/a11y-team.png
  95. MichielBijl
    15:05
    Alt="The a11y-team in stencil font face (similar to the A-team logo)"
  96. deborahgu
    15:14
    can I be the A-Team's murdock?
  97. stevefaulkner
    15:21
    @garcialo sailesh panchang was the name I was looking for, one of the few Deque University staff I would call an expert ;-)
  98. garcialo
    15:21
    Ah yes, Sailesh.
  99. garcialo
    15:21
    Hah
  100. MichielBijl
    15:25
    There is a leaked press photo from the upcoming talk: http://dir.agosto.nl/accessibility/a-team.jpg
  101. MichielBijl
    15:25
    alt = "Mallory's, Steve's, and Michiel's faces badly photoshopped onto an A-Team press photo"
  102. stevefaulkner
    15:26
    :+1: :clap:
  103. MichielBijl
    15:26
    @deborahgu At this time only the position for BA is free.
  104. garcialo
    15:26
    That is disturbing. Please reserve such things for Slack's #steve channel.
  105. MichielBijl
    15:26
    Haha
  106. deborahgu
    15:26
    I aspite to BA but am sadly not that cool.
  107. MichielBijl
    15:27
    Maybe @StommePoes would like to trade you for it ;)
  108. stevefaulkner
    15:27
    @deborahgu never understimate your coolness!
  109. zakim-robot
    15:31
    [jitendra] which was invented first, search engine or doctype?
  110. MichielBijl
    15:32
    I think HTML was around before the first search engine.
  111. MichielBijl
    15:33
    Maybe other languages that use a doctype too before that.
  112. StommePoes
    17:20
    I can totally be BA
  113. StommePoes
    17:20
    I PITY DA FOO
  114. StommePoes
    17:20
    I think doctypes were first
  115. StommePoes
    17:21
    I also think we could easily photoshop Steve's face over Hannibal
  116. dylanb
    17:35
    @MichielBijl HTML does not redate the first search engine...only the first Web search engine
  117. dylanb
    17:35
    *predate
  118. dylanb
    17:36
    but now I am showing my age
  119. dylanb
    17:41
    if you are interested, here is some early research that led to search engines http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=367400
  120. zakim-robot
    17:42
    [jitendra] this is awesome https://twitter.com/jonathansampson/status/659481744521822208
  121. stevefaulkner
    17:46
    Grandpa = @dylanb
  122. dylanb
    17:49
    technically old enough
  123. dylanb
    17:49
    also, so are my children...
  124. zakim-robot
    17:57
    [bkardell] @jitendra: if you mean internet search of any kind, must be - doctype, because it was part of SGML which dates back to the 60s in some form or other - well before anyone was even thinking about searching because there was nothing to search :simple_smile:
  125. MichielBijl
    18:16
    @dylanb yeah that is what I figured
  126. dylanb
    18:17
    :-)
  127. MichielBijl
    18:32
    Kind of ballsy of ACM to put RealMedia Player under useful links.
  128. MichielBijl
    18:32
    14 euro seems kind of steep
  129. MichielBijl
    18:32
    But it is 490 pages long…
  130. MichielBijl
    18:33
    Anyone here a member? :P
  131. garcialo
    18:33
    I was in college
  132. MichielBijl
    18:34
    Me too, not sure we had access to ACM though
  133. MichielBijl
    18:34
    Well, we did have university access stuff, can't quite remember what was included.
  134. zakim-robot
    21:00
    [car] Does anyone use React.js? My dev colleagues have been talking about it lately: https://facebook.github.io/react/
    I am wondering if it is easier/harder/same to make things accessible with React?
    A very quick google found this example React a11y-checker: http://react.rocks/example/react-a11y
  135. zakim-robot
    21:17
    [marcysutton] We have a @react channel, that might be a good place to chat about it :smile:
  136. zakim-robot
    21:32
    [car] Ah. Wouldn't've guessed. :) Thanks, Marcy.
  137. zakim-robot
    21:48
    [marcysutton] I think it presents the same challenges as other client-rendered apps though…I know focus management still has to be handled by the developer