WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: two worthwhile reads

for

From: Tim Harshbarger
Date: Sep 8, 2014 7:31AM

While I definitely agree that it is good to praise people for the progress they do make while encouraging them to improve the accessibility in the future, I think I can also understand the perspective of people who don't want to accept anything less than complete accessibility.

If you believe that people with disabilities have a right to access, then it is easy to understand why you might feel that accessibility should be an expectation and any UI that isn't accessible should be considered poor quality.

From that perspective, small improvements to accessibility really aren't praiseworthy. It would be kind of like praising a project team for getting the look and feel of the buttons right even though they screwed up everything else on the UI. Also, I suspect that letting the other accessibility issues go when you know that the project team spent their focus working on other items that had less impact on individual users feels like a pretty rotten compromise.

However, I have a feeling that the best approach to increase accessibility of user interfaces across the board includes using both carrots and sticks. As much as I wish people could be engaged in such a manner that they all would choose to make things accessible, I think the pragmatic view is that such isn't the case. I feel that accessibility is closely tied to societal views on disability and there will always be people that hold a view of disability that will make accessibility seem to be trivial.

Of course, the pragmatic view also dictates that you use what you have to get done what you need to get done. So, if all you have is carrots, then you have to use them the best way you can. However, if you only have carrots or only have sticks, you probably won't ever be able to get as far as if you had everything you needed.

And brian, I did like what you put together. It definitely was both humourous and thought-provoking.

Thanks!
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Len Burns
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2014 3:38 PM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] two worthwhile reads

Dennis,

This is well stated. I work in an environment where many developers are
already covering not only their own job but that of others due to short
staffing and lack of resources. My strategy is as much appreciation of
improvements as providing feedback and technical consultation. I get much
further by demonstrating an understanding that improvements in accessibility
must balance with other pressing priorities. The outcome is not going to be
perfection. My goals are to support steady improvement where those changes
will have the greatest benefit. It is often exasperating, but I do my best
to transform my exasperation into positive outcomes.

-Len

-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Denis Boudreau
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2014 12:56 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] two worthwhile reads

I agree with you, Karl. I know, this is not a good way to make new friends.
;)

While this is not the only reason and probably not the most important one
either, our unreasonable expectations for perfection most likely explain why
accessibility is viewed by a lot of people has being so hard.

If you follow the thread that was generated from my tweet (mostly from
members of our echo chamber, unsurprisingly), you will see that a lot of
really good, valid and legitimate feedback was shared. hat being said, what
struck me yesterday as I was going through that feedback was that it seems
like it is very easy for us to put the blame on the armies of developers,
designers and otherwise clueless stakeholders out there who don't get it
right off the bat.

What we more rarely hear about (and was vastly overlooked in that Twitter
discussion) is recognizing our own inability to make accessibility engaging,
interesting or even exciting to people outside our field. Developers and
designers are used to tackling hard problems, they do it all the time. If
they're not willing to tackle this one, maybe it's because we're partly
responsible with all our religious WCAG compliance nonsense. And maybe
managers don't bite into it much because accessibility usually tastes like
fear, uncertainty and doubt (make sure not to be sued).

By demanding nothing less than perfection, by setting these impossible to
reach golden standards, and by quickly gunning down anyone who makes even
the smallest of mistakes while trying to do the right thing, we are creating
a situation where it just becomes impossible to please us. Of course, there
are a lot of bad developers and designers out there, and then there are also
the lazy ones (just like in any field), but I wouldn't be surprised if most
people who give up on accessibiility do so because we directly or indirectly
drive them to do it.

I witness examples of our intolerance in email threads, blog post comments
and on social media all the time, and so do you. If we lowered our
expectations, were a little more tolerant and allowed people to make
mistakes as long as they're really trying to do the right thing, maybe we'd
have more success and maybe our discipline would be more welcomed in the
mainstream.

Unfortunately, it seems that for every accessiblity specialist out there who
embraces a pragmatic, empathetic and welcoming approach to accessibility,
there are about 10 who swear only but WCAG 2.0 hard-lines.

/Denis





On Sep 6, 2014, at 10:13 PM, Karl Groves < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> "do web accessibility professionals have a sense of humour?"
>
> It appears not.
>
> Sad, really.
>
> Denis Boudreau recently asked "A question for y'all this morning: why
> do you think people feel that web accessibility is so hard?"
> (https://twitter.com/dboudreau/status/508275085942464512)
>
> Here's why I think it is so hard: because accessibility people expect
> perfection and they're so willing to name and shame people who aren't
> perfect. Accessibility people are constantly fighting among each
> other and looking for stuff to complain about.
>
> Bryan tried posting something humorous. Yeah, it was off-topic for the
> mailing list, but who cares? I'd rather see humor on WAI-IG than
> another idiotic debate about whether everything needs to work on Lynx
> or not.
>
> People need to stop looking around every corner for the next thing
> that offends them and start looking for real, tangible, impactful ways
> to advance accessibility into the mainstream.
>
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Jennison Mark Asuncion
> < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Once again, WebAIM has done great work and has published salary and
>> other useful insights into working in digital accessibility. Results
>> of their summer survey are here
>> http://webaim.org/projects/practitionersurvey/
>>
>> I also came across this piece and thought I'd share it. The '100%
>> accessible website' joke--do web accessibility professionals have a
>> sense of humour?
>>
http://www.accessiq.org/news/w3c-column/2014/09/the-100-accessible-website-j
oke-do-web-accessibility-professionals-have-a
>>
>> Jennison
>> >> >> >
>
>
> --
>
> Karl Groves
> www.karlgroves.com
> @karlgroves
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/karlgroves
> Phone: +1 410.541.6829
>
> Modern Web Toolsets and Accessibility
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uq6Db47-Ks
>
> www.tenon.io
> > >