WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: two worthwhile reads

for

From: Karl Groves
Date: Sep 8, 2014 8:34AM

Rachel,

i have several blog posts relating to "Selling accessibility" that may
interest you
http://www.karlgroves.com/category/selling-accessibility/

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Thompson, Rachel < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> And to clarify, my institution is at the beginning of its accessibility
> initiative. We starting reviewing important UA sites and talking with
> their web teams just a few weeks ago. If you have suggestions on how to
> move it along, how to best talk to the skilled professionals who create
> sites that may have accessibility issues, etc, please share.
>
> Rachel
>
> Dr. Rachel S. Thompson
> Director, Emerging Technology and Accessibility
> Center for Instructional Technology
> University of Alabama
> http://accessibility.ua.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 09/08/14, 8:40 AM, "Thompson, Rachel" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> I¹m new to this field, new to this struggle, and I still have so much to
> learn (many thanks to all of YOU for being my teachers, whether you know
> it or not).
>
> I am having accessibility conversations with developers and designers from
> our campus and vendors from off-campus who supply many of the systems we
> use. I have seen debates on the a11y lists that make my head spin. Our
> developers and designers don¹t need to get bogged down in those details,
> as far as I can tell, unless they want to. They need from us clear-cut
> information about what is needed and recommendations on how to make that
> happen. What I have been asked for are (1) a definitive list of what is
> expected from a site/page (I share WCAG 2.0 AA in less technical language
> with links to the real deal), (2) examples from their sites/tools that are
> a problem for users. Done and done. It is always a conversation, always a
> dialogue. It has never been (and I hope will not become) a list of demands
> from me to our web design and development professionals, who roll their
> eyes at my unreasonableness and that silly accessibility stuff. We need to
> be a part of their team, at least while a site gets fixed or planned or
> through whichever stage it is in.
>
> I got the Ta-da joke after a few moments and it made me chuckle. I¹m glad
> this discussion is happening and I hope we can laugh at ourselves more
> frequently. It would be a good way to engage other groups we work with and
> show that some of us recognize that 100% accessible is an unattainable
> goal and unfunded mandate. I¹m gonna quote Denis here and continue to
> embrace "a pragmatic, empathetic and welcoming approach to accessibility².
>
> Happy Monday, y¹all.
>
> Rachel
>
> Dr. Rachel S. Thompson
> Director, Emerging Technology and Accessibility
> Center for Instructional Technology
> University of Alabama
> http://accessibility.ua.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 09/07/14, 2:56 PM, "Denis Boudreau" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> 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
> don¹t 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 they¹re not willing to tackle this one, maybe it¹s
> because we¹re partly responsible with all our religious WCAG compliance
> nonsense. And maybe managers don¹t 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 wouldn¹t
> 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 they¹re really trying to do the right thing, maybe
> we¹d 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 y¹all 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-websit
>>>e-joke-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
>> >> >> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > --

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