Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

23

You should use an empty alt attribute for images that are purely decorative. I'd argue that in the example you gave it is worth supplying an alt attribute that describes the image e.g. alt="Portrait of Jane Doe". @KitGrose mentions that including this text will also make the image searchable to image search engines such as Google Image. I reserve empty alt ...


13

You need to clearly communicate in a non visual sense the fact that the menu has sub menu items. When thinking about the problem like this it turns out that you aren't restricted to just output text as you can also use the text in the tags and attributes. For visually impaired users you should be thinking in text, not images (this is actually very good ...


6

To begin with, most companies (i.e., clients) are little educated about accessibility. This is in the same way that many commercial spaces are not designed for wheelchair users, and even in public spaces information boards are often too high for those. In addition, accessibility concerns are vast and diverse. Yet the user group they serve is relatively low ...


4

Without accessibility you cannot sell your product to some very large customers like the US government or the European Union (soon) because it is a pre-requisite. For many non-institutional customers this isn't a concern. Still, implementing accessibility is a good practice for many reasons (first of all ethical). Source: Section 508 Amendment to the ...


4

It's semantically incorrect, and I'm not sure of all the ramifications of that incorrectness, but I recommend using more semantically appropriate characters like right arrow → (→) and left arrow ← (←). I think most screen readers, if they audiblize them, would use the character names ("right arrow" and "left arrow"), and this is probably ...


3

When building a website for a client, I'd like to be able to sell the extra cost of making the website screen reader friendly. The problem is trying to sell it as an extra cost. A properly built web site is, by default, screen reader (and, as such, also search engine) friendly. As for your actual question, the National Federation of the Blind has ...


3

Some experience with this, but not a developer. Progressive disclosure is not in and of itself inaccessible; it's the way it's implemented. Be really careful with show and hide properties. One of my former teammates is visually impaired and we relied on him to test public-facing web apps. He found two big issues that made it impossible for him to proceed ...


3

What is necessary is all relative. That said, there are plenty of agencies where quality of product takes a back seat to winning design awards. Given that they are still in business and making money, from a purely business perspective, I guess accessibility isn't necessary for them. But like any industry, there are plenty of financially succesful ...


3

It sounds as if this agency are not fully educated in UX, they may have a loose definition or use it as a marketing tool. As far as I can tell there may well be projects where you know that the end user will, for example, always have perfect 20/20 vision (if it's aimed at active RAF pilots for example) in which case you can safely drop that part of the ...


2

Voice browser is a custom solution for people who can't see, while screen reader is a way to target people who can't see for services that are primarily designed for mainstream audience. To answer your question, yes it's necessary to have a tool like that for developers to use. Since what if I am trying to make a website that is for people who can't see, ...


2

Back in the day these were quite common so perhaps has become a form of an anti-pattern. But you are correct, these are actually punctuation characters...not visual arrows. So it is awkward to have them read out-loud in a screen reader (or view them if you are French). Today, I'd argue, we can do much better with CSS. Create the arrow icon as you see fit ...


2

In-page 3rd party plugins for reading websites aloud are no longer useful for websites, and I'd even go as far as to say they're worse for accessibility than not including it. If people benefit from using screenreaders then it is highly likely that they would have discovered this long before visiting your website. After all, Jakob's Law of the Web User ...


2

I would say another way to word your request is potentially "Number of active (legally) blind computer users globally" Or maybe you can combine stats yourself, global computer users + global counts of the visually impaired. That being said, you should always code to make your site accessible by the greatest number of users, unless you can somehow guarantee ...


1

There are five "features" you can enable for screen reader users: (1) Jump to the navigation. (I want to go somewhere else.) (2) Announce that it’s for navigation. (Where am I?) (3) Label for the navigation. (What is this navigation for?) (4) Read/navigate its links. (Where can I go?) (5) Count its links. (How long/complex is it?) (1) and (2) can be ...


1

The National Federation of the Blind can help answer questions about statistics and need, and provide you with links to resources, including standards. However, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) makes screen reader compliance pretty much compulsory. It should not be seen as an "if we can afford it" option.


1

I think running the website through something like wave can give you a good idea on your sites accessibility. Personally I would not pay for something like BrowseAloud I would try to adhere to WCAG 2.0 and W3C (as suggested by JonW), and good programming practice, and run actual tests with real users using screen readers like JAWS. (there are a number ...


1

Use alt text to describes what it is. You don't have to try and reproduce the map in words. So something like "map showing company headquarters in London" or "Map showing the location of the best pizza restaurants in Florence".


1

Voice Browsers and Screen Readers are really two separate technologies that just both happen to use TTS, but that's about as much as they have in common.They're really separate technologies with separate audiences, goals and concerns. Here are some of the main differences that come to mind: (Disclaimer - my background is very much on the ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible