Just got another email from a blind user of SourceHut thanking me for caring about accessibility in my work. And honestly, it wasn't difficult. I don't understand why my peers in web development seemingly couldn't give a rat's ass about accessibility. Maybe because at their level of complexity, to them "accessibility" means "a shitload of aira tags and a ton of work", whereas at my level of complexity it means "just keep it simple and don't do anything particularly stupid"

Maybe there's a blog post in this, like "Simplicity is the easiest path to accessibility on the web"

@sir Sad but true. This is the same crowd that developed entire stacks that required poorly reimplementing such things as a navigation history, image loading, and scrolling.

@sir you get most of the way to accessible web by writing simple, semantic, structured HTML instead of DIV soup filled with chewy chunks of javascript.

@sir That sounds like a great future blogpost!

(and very much what I'm trying to communicate by building "Rhapsode")

@alcinnz can you change your demo from a wav to an ogg

@sir Fixed! I've now uploaded .ogg files & linked to them for the demos (though the .wav are still online).

I tried to tell Rhapsode to output .ogg, but either my code or libsndfile failed. So I ran the .wavs through a converter.

@sir what specifically did you do that helped this user?

@waterbear they complimented the accessibility of the services in general terms, I did not need to make any special concessions for this particular user

@sir right, but what about the service made it accessible?

HTML by default is very accessible. It's when you start adding css and js cruft that accessibility is a feature

@karan @sir if html were accessible why did html5 get rid of the mandatory wheelchair ramps </gripe> :blobcatangery:

@sir is there a (preferably foss) screen reader you recommend? I'd like to test the usability of my site.

@zethra I've building one myself! Which is it's own browser (engine), independant of any others.

It won't be representative of what people actually use & isn't complete yet, but it should put you in a better mindset by not displaying the page.

Beyond that I've heard of Orca for Linux-based systems, & Mac has VoiceOver builtin. Not that I really know what to recommend.


@zethra @sir The vast majority of blind people (unfortunately) still use Windows. On it, the most popular screen reader is NVDA, which is FLOSS.
On Linux, the most common choice is Orca, which comes built in with many of the more popular distros (such as Debian).

@Mayana @zethra @sir I second this. Apart from quite an out-of-date version of Talkback on Android, these are really the only well-known FLOSS screen readers, without getting into super small communities like that of Emacspeak (yes, that Emacs). And while NVDA is very well-developed, Orca doesn't get the attension it deserves, especially on the frontend.

Good speech synths are also very hard to come by in the Linux world, especially free ones. Espeak[-ng] is pretty much the only common option


> Maybe because at their level of complexity, to them "accessibility" means "a shitload of aira tags and a ton of work"

That sounds about right. Treat HTML as documents and they are inherently accesible. Treat it as an app development platform 3 layers down from where you write your code and suddenly it becomes as hard as in any GUI framework.

@sir probably two fold...

1) the people above them wont let them invest the time in it (oftent he case)

or 2) they dont even realize their site isnt accessible in some way. It can be hard to understand that.

@sir I'll have to check out your work more! Speaking of, this is a recent PR. Could you take a look? Are they in the right direction? They use Bootstrap. #a11y #accessibility

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!