RE: progresive enhancement, and wcag guides?

“In lots of ways though, it's worth pointing out to naysayers that following WCAG also makes the UX better for non-disabled users too.”

 

And what are these ways exactly? Level A success criteria are intended to have minimal or no impact on visual design and only a handful of Level AA success criteria could conceivably improve user experience.

 

 

From: Michael Livesey <mike.j.livesey@gmail.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2024 3:39 PM
To: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: progresive enhancement, and wcag guides?

 

Hi Karen,

WCAG is there to ensure anyone with any disability can have the same usability as non-disabled users. 

In lots of ways though, it's worth pointing out to naysayers that following WCAG also makes the UX better for non-disabled users too.

Disabilities can be physical (unable to use the mouse), poor sight/blindness, learning disabilities (ensuring the user knows their position on the page and that things are clear) and many more. Mild disabilities affect a significant number of computer users, WCAG isn't just for a tiny few percentage of users!

As to progressive enhancement, there is one failure condition in the guidelines that points to this, but it is highly contentious and I believe it has been under discussion to be reworked/removed.

Many developers feel that supporting a CSS/JavaScript free website is not tenable today and, in fact, to follow progressive enhancement would be detrimental to providing the best experience for both disabled and non-disabled users. (There are also old school devs who still believe in it).

I would suggest to follow the guidelines and use all available modern tooling to give your users the best UX.



On Tuesday, May 7, 2024, Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net <mailto:klewellen@shellworld.net> > wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am hoping that there is a link to well anything, guidance material for example, that provides  wisdom around progressive enhancement design.
> how, as I understand it, working from this foundation  creates broader access, can, in theory, get one closer to wcag compliance?
> I am encountering far too many folks who either believe that wcag only applies to sight loss, or that it *mandates* certain tools must be used legally...and some of that comes from the u. s. state department.
> Thanks,
> Karen
>
>
>
>