Accessible web
-
This[^] article made it to today's newsletter. I wonder, how many of you (web developers) comply with accessibility standards? They were sued mostly for not having the alt attributes (alt is not a tag!) on images. I put them on all images in the pages I design, but I almost always leave them empty... I know what they're used for, but I have them there only to comply with XHTML standards as proposed by W3C. I used to fill in every alt attribute, but when I got a sliced-up website from a designer it made no sense at all. Each image tag requires an alt attribute, but what do I put there for a sliced image? "header1", "header2" and "footer3"? Or "Page Header Slice 1"? I can understand it if you have an image menu (these suck nowadays, CSS is better), so you can put the menu item names in alt attributes, but some images are used purely for layout and to make the site appeal to users, not for any functional reasons. I admit I always forget about impaired people, perhaps it is because I have never met anyone blind who was surfing the web. :omg: Do you know anyone? Besides, as an excuse :| for me - I don't create ecommerce websites and I doubt blind people would be the target of my web applications.
-
This[^] article made it to today's newsletter. I wonder, how many of you (web developers) comply with accessibility standards? They were sued mostly for not having the alt attributes (alt is not a tag!) on images. I put them on all images in the pages I design, but I almost always leave them empty... I know what they're used for, but I have them there only to comply with XHTML standards as proposed by W3C. I used to fill in every alt attribute, but when I got a sliced-up website from a designer it made no sense at all. Each image tag requires an alt attribute, but what do I put there for a sliced image? "header1", "header2" and "footer3"? Or "Page Header Slice 1"? I can understand it if you have an image menu (these suck nowadays, CSS is better), so you can put the menu item names in alt attributes, but some images are used purely for layout and to make the site appeal to users, not for any functional reasons. I admit I always forget about impaired people, perhaps it is because I have never met anyone blind who was surfing the web. :omg: Do you know anyone? Besides, as an excuse :| for me - I don't create ecommerce websites and I doubt blind people would be the target of my web applications.
-
This[^] article made it to today's newsletter. I wonder, how many of you (web developers) comply with accessibility standards? They were sued mostly for not having the alt attributes (alt is not a tag!) on images. I put them on all images in the pages I design, but I almost always leave them empty... I know what they're used for, but I have them there only to comply with XHTML standards as proposed by W3C. I used to fill in every alt attribute, but when I got a sliced-up website from a designer it made no sense at all. Each image tag requires an alt attribute, but what do I put there for a sliced image? "header1", "header2" and "footer3"? Or "Page Header Slice 1"? I can understand it if you have an image menu (these suck nowadays, CSS is better), so you can put the menu item names in alt attributes, but some images are used purely for layout and to make the site appeal to users, not for any functional reasons. I admit I always forget about impaired people, perhaps it is because I have never met anyone blind who was surfing the web. :omg: Do you know anyone? Besides, as an excuse :| for me - I don't create ecommerce websites and I doubt blind people would be the target of my web applications.
Plenty of visually impaired people surf the net and use a variety of screen readers and other output devices. Even something as simple as letting the user increase font size will help many. As visually scanning the page is mostly impossible, the users get the readers to read out the text very quickly and they stop it at a point of interest then work backwards until the start is found. What is really annoying is getting emails with html embedded in them. Some readers can't cope with the URLs and read it out character by character, including ampersands, open close brackets etc etc. This makes the mail virtually unreadable. I understand why you don't fill in the alt attributes on images, but really it is just down to laziness. How much longer does it take to add a few words to a tag? 10 seconds maybe - but that 10 seconds DOES make the difference between being confused on a page you can't see and being able to navigate the page more efficiently and also feel like someone has actually taken you into account and not ignored you.
I still remember having to write your own code in FORTRAN rather than be a cut and paste merchant being pampered by colour coded Intellisense - ahh proper programming - those were the days :)
-
This[^] article made it to today's newsletter. I wonder, how many of you (web developers) comply with accessibility standards? They were sued mostly for not having the alt attributes (alt is not a tag!) on images. I put them on all images in the pages I design, but I almost always leave them empty... I know what they're used for, but I have them there only to comply with XHTML standards as proposed by W3C. I used to fill in every alt attribute, but when I got a sliced-up website from a designer it made no sense at all. Each image tag requires an alt attribute, but what do I put there for a sliced image? "header1", "header2" and "footer3"? Or "Page Header Slice 1"? I can understand it if you have an image menu (these suck nowadays, CSS is better), so you can put the menu item names in alt attributes, but some images are used purely for layout and to make the site appeal to users, not for any functional reasons. I admit I always forget about impaired people, perhaps it is because I have never met anyone blind who was surfing the web. :omg: Do you know anyone? Besides, as an excuse :| for me - I don't create ecommerce websites and I doubt blind people would be the target of my web applications.
My step mom is a DB programmer for a very large insurance company here in SA, she works in their data warehouse. In her team she has a blind(born blind) programmer. i cant even begin to comprehend how he does it, but apparently his tools are all command line and he has a brail(sp?) display and keyboard. There is a normal screen attached to his pc and is apparently only on so that the other team members dont feel uncomfortable. having said that, im sure he surfs the net... somehow
Harvey Saayman - South Africa Junior Developer .Net, C#, SQL
you.suck = (you.passion != Programming) -
My step mom is a DB programmer for a very large insurance company here in SA, she works in their data warehouse. In her team she has a blind(born blind) programmer. i cant even begin to comprehend how he does it, but apparently his tools are all command line and he has a brail(sp?) display and keyboard. There is a normal screen attached to his pc and is apparently only on so that the other team members dont feel uncomfortable. having said that, im sure he surfs the net... somehow
Harvey Saayman - South Africa Junior Developer .Net, C#, SQL
you.suck = (you.passion != Programming)I met someone who used a screen reader and VB6. Like you I just couldn't comprehend how he got round the screen so fast, understood what he was hearing and wrote the programs. Obviously he knew every keyboard shortcut and it was fascinating watching him do his work. when anyone starts to disagree with my thoughts on providing better access to the PC, I just ask them to wear my glasses (quite strong prescription) and then do their normal job. They soon get the message.
I still remember having to write your own code in FORTRAN rather than be a cut and paste merchant being pampered by colour coded Intellisense - ahh proper programming - those were the days :)
-
Plenty of visually impaired people surf the net and use a variety of screen readers and other output devices. Even something as simple as letting the user increase font size will help many. As visually scanning the page is mostly impossible, the users get the readers to read out the text very quickly and they stop it at a point of interest then work backwards until the start is found. What is really annoying is getting emails with html embedded in them. Some readers can't cope with the URLs and read it out character by character, including ampersands, open close brackets etc etc. This makes the mail virtually unreadable. I understand why you don't fill in the alt attributes on images, but really it is just down to laziness. How much longer does it take to add a few words to a tag? 10 seconds maybe - but that 10 seconds DOES make the difference between being confused on a page you can't see and being able to navigate the page more efficiently and also feel like someone has actually taken you into account and not ignored you.
I still remember having to write your own code in FORTRAN rather than be a cut and paste merchant being pampered by colour coded Intellisense - ahh proper programming - those were the days :)
Baconbutty wrote:
visually impaired
Weasel Words! Blind Deaf and Dumb I have a friend, Paul. He was born almost Blind and Almost Deaf and totally dumb. This was not a prob, he learnt to sign. (This is one of the reasons I learnt, to speak with him and his friends). One christmas, about 15 years ago Paul was working on a cleanup team, shredding xmas trees. His hands went into the machine. Paul now has two metal hooks. Poor bastard I hear you think, but no, he still gets out on a saturday, comes down the pub, has a few pints(with a straw) smokes, and chats. (Slightly one sided, but communicates nontheless) He HATES Visually impaired and Aurally Challenged, he is way too disabled for that crap, he laughs and gets on with it.
------------------------------------ "The production of useful work is strictly limited by the laws of thermodynamics. The production of useless work seems to be unlimited." - Donald E. Simanek
-
This[^] article made it to today's newsletter. I wonder, how many of you (web developers) comply with accessibility standards? They were sued mostly for not having the alt attributes (alt is not a tag!) on images. I put them on all images in the pages I design, but I almost always leave them empty... I know what they're used for, but I have them there only to comply with XHTML standards as proposed by W3C. I used to fill in every alt attribute, but when I got a sliced-up website from a designer it made no sense at all. Each image tag requires an alt attribute, but what do I put there for a sliced image? "header1", "header2" and "footer3"? Or "Page Header Slice 1"? I can understand it if you have an image menu (these suck nowadays, CSS is better), so you can put the menu item names in alt attributes, but some images are used purely for layout and to make the site appeal to users, not for any functional reasons. I admit I always forget about impaired people, perhaps it is because I have never met anyone blind who was surfing the web. :omg: Do you know anyone? Besides, as an excuse :| for me - I don't create ecommerce websites and I doubt blind people would be the target of my web applications.
I saw a video of a blind guy playing Starcraft with a former world champion. He was given a head start, he lost, but it was a good fight with nothing at random. Should be on youtube (search for something like "Starcraft Slayer Boxer vs blind guy").
-
Baconbutty wrote:
visually impaired
Weasel Words! Blind Deaf and Dumb I have a friend, Paul. He was born almost Blind and Almost Deaf and totally dumb. This was not a prob, he learnt to sign. (This is one of the reasons I learnt, to speak with him and his friends). One christmas, about 15 years ago Paul was working on a cleanup team, shredding xmas trees. His hands went into the machine. Paul now has two metal hooks. Poor bastard I hear you think, but no, he still gets out on a saturday, comes down the pub, has a few pints(with a straw) smokes, and chats. (Slightly one sided, but communicates nontheless) He HATES Visually impaired and Aurally Challenged, he is way too disabled for that crap, he laughs and gets on with it.
------------------------------------ "The production of useful work is strictly limited by the laws of thermodynamics. The production of useless work seems to be unlimited." - Donald E. Simanek
Conversely, the people I know who are in this position prefer the v.a term as the word "Blind" conjures up people waving sticks around and falling over the slightest raised object or bumping into things. V.A., to them, lets other people know they just can't see as well as the majority. If I didn't have glasses I think I too would be in that grouping. I can see clearly anything within 5-6 inches of my eyes.
I still remember having to write your own code in FORTRAN rather than be a cut and paste merchant being pampered by colour coded Intellisense - ahh proper programming - those were the days :)
-
This[^] article made it to today's newsletter. I wonder, how many of you (web developers) comply with accessibility standards? They were sued mostly for not having the alt attributes (alt is not a tag!) on images. I put them on all images in the pages I design, but I almost always leave them empty... I know what they're used for, but I have them there only to comply with XHTML standards as proposed by W3C. I used to fill in every alt attribute, but when I got a sliced-up website from a designer it made no sense at all. Each image tag requires an alt attribute, but what do I put there for a sliced image? "header1", "header2" and "footer3"? Or "Page Header Slice 1"? I can understand it if you have an image menu (these suck nowadays, CSS is better), so you can put the menu item names in alt attributes, but some images are used purely for layout and to make the site appeal to users, not for any functional reasons. I admit I always forget about impaired people, perhaps it is because I have never met anyone blind who was surfing the web. :omg: Do you know anyone? Besides, as an excuse :| for me - I don't create ecommerce websites and I doubt blind people would be the target of my web applications.
There are other ways. If you are using images as a page header, then why not use CSS to position it? This way, it doesn't form part of the page as far as screen readers are concerned, and it doesn't require the alt tag. Of course, you should only do this if the image doesn't form an essential part of the page. If you develop web pages for a company, it is up to YOU to ensure that you conform to disability legislation. There are no excuses.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
Plenty of visually impaired people surf the net and use a variety of screen readers and other output devices. Even something as simple as letting the user increase font size will help many. As visually scanning the page is mostly impossible, the users get the readers to read out the text very quickly and they stop it at a point of interest then work backwards until the start is found. What is really annoying is getting emails with html embedded in them. Some readers can't cope with the URLs and read it out character by character, including ampersands, open close brackets etc etc. This makes the mail virtually unreadable. I understand why you don't fill in the alt attributes on images, but really it is just down to laziness. How much longer does it take to add a few words to a tag? 10 seconds maybe - but that 10 seconds DOES make the difference between being confused on a page you can't see and being able to navigate the page more efficiently and also feel like someone has actually taken you into account and not ignored you.
I still remember having to write your own code in FORTRAN rather than be a cut and paste merchant being pampered by colour coded Intellisense - ahh proper programming - those were the days :)
Baconbutty wrote:
I understand why you don't fill in the alt attributes on images, but really it is just down to laziness
I disagree, at least when it is about me. I think it makes no sense if the image is not clickable and does not provide any functionality or means of page navigation at all. I once had alt attributes such as "page header" and "subheader1" and "subheader2". Basically I started off with all alt attributes filled in and later removed them. So I was not lazy, it was quite the opposite. I didn't like it when I hovered the mouse cursor over the images and it said something like "subheader2". Besides every character adds up to bandwidth usage, but perhaps it's not so strong argument today. So, no, it is not laziness for me. I always have alt attributes filled in for menus, clickable images that redirect you to another page, etc.
-
This[^] article made it to today's newsletter. I wonder, how many of you (web developers) comply with accessibility standards? They were sued mostly for not having the alt attributes (alt is not a tag!) on images. I put them on all images in the pages I design, but I almost always leave them empty... I know what they're used for, but I have them there only to comply with XHTML standards as proposed by W3C. I used to fill in every alt attribute, but when I got a sliced-up website from a designer it made no sense at all. Each image tag requires an alt attribute, but what do I put there for a sliced image? "header1", "header2" and "footer3"? Or "Page Header Slice 1"? I can understand it if you have an image menu (these suck nowadays, CSS is better), so you can put the menu item names in alt attributes, but some images are used purely for layout and to make the site appeal to users, not for any functional reasons. I admit I always forget about impaired people, perhaps it is because I have never met anyone blind who was surfing the web. :omg: Do you know anyone? Besides, as an excuse :| for me - I don't create ecommerce websites and I doubt blind people would be the target of my web applications.
In the US, we have this "508 Compliance" standard that, depending on what industry your company (websites) are in and who you deal with (especally Government Agencies), it's a requirement. Having done several applications/web apps/web sites that had that requirement, it's a pain in the Butt! However, it allows sight impaired people to use those apps without restrictions, and therefore without discrimination. The worst example was the application I worked on for a Transportation organization (one of the largest in the US). It tracked vehicles across country and monitored thier current status for any sign of breakdowns or emergencies. One of the operators was "Legally Blind" but due to equal opportunity, he was required to have the same accessibility to the app as everyone else. So, we had a special monitor that was bought just for him, and the application had to be made (font and screen size) so large that the most letters viewable at any one time was maybe 10! He would scroll the screen, reading as he went...