Re: Accessibility, perfect or better Re: hit testing and retained graphics

On 7/1/2011 11:24 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> >  Canvas semantics with CSS attributes provide for equivalency
>> >  with the UA-level elements in the render tree.
>> >
>> >  You're not "doing it wrong", when you are using the
>> >  very technology that the browser runs on, and using the
>> >  DOM/HTML semantics that the web users.
>> >
>> >  When you're following the standards, using standard
>> >  APIs, you're doing application development "right".
> There are a small number of browsers, written by large teams of
> incredibly smart and talented people, who have incentives to do a11y
> well.
>
> There are an incredible number of webapps, written mostly by single
> hackers or small teams of varying skill levels and education, most of
> whom don't have any real reason to do a11y well since making the app
> work for 80% of people is good enough.
>
> The former group only has to get a11y right a few times, and they can
> do this because they're very smart.  The latter group is just as smart
> (or smarter) collectively, but they have to get it right millions of
> times, mostly independently.
>
> This is not a false dichotomy.

SVG accessibility and implementations prove that the limited number of 
corporations
with their hat in the ring are not sufficiently serving the audience 
that I am targeting.

Economic theories, whether Hayek, Kaynes or otherwise, have the same 
solution for
the situation: competition.

Enabling a million developers to experiment with communication is a 
better situation
than restricting the experiment to a few dozen developers.

And as for doing it once, doing it once right, doing it once well -- 
that is certainly something
that UA vendors should do in relation to ARIA and DOM; so that the rest 
of us can
communicate with users.

Other than that, get out of our way. That's how I -feel- about it.

-Charles

Received on Sunday, 3 July 2011 05:10:30 UTC