> As an industry, why haven't we figured out how to make drop downs that consistently open for all users? Is accessibility just that hard? Are there web frameworks/web components BBC should be using that already handle this?
I don't know the answers to all the questions, but "is accessibility just that hard" is a firm, concrete, YES.
Here's some real world examples, modals. If you are not a vision impaired user, you can see what's going on when you're presented with a white box containing ui components swimming in a sea of "don't touch this bit" grey.
If you're using a screen reader there's no guarantee that you'll receive any of that information. When your screen reader controls tab through the UI elements and you land back at the top of the box, will your particular screen reader report that to you? Will it list the available interactable elements? Will it list them in the same order as the other screen readers? How about on phone? How about on Mac? Will your screen reader and browser report the inputs right, or will it silently allow the user to fall out of the modal and back into the rest of the site?
When it comes to accessibility you can't trust that the OS, browser and the screen reader are cooperative, or even that they'll do something sane in the right situation.
In 2019 I had to log a bug with VoiceOver + Safari because a negative CSS margin could cause screen readers to read RTL text blocks out of order. Users with unimpaired vision would see "9/10/2019" and on the screen reader you would hear "ten slash nine slash two-thousand-and-nineteen", as a stopgap measure we had to set the text aria-hidden and put in an invisible p tag there with the correctly ordered text so screen readers wouldn't choke on it.
All this to say, sometimes when you see some jank code relating to accessibility there really isn't a better way to do it. Even if you dumped everything, turned the codebase upside down and focused on accessibility first you'd see stuff inexplicably break the moment JAWS or VoiceOver updates.
Equally if we didn't distance ourselves from people who make harmful mistakes and those who believe dangerous, bigoted things we would all live miserably.
Jewish communities are more tightly knit, and the families in these communities more interwoven with one another than the average Protestant would be to their own.
My intuition would be that nepotism would be more rife with this kind of community makeup, if you know your distant family and your family friends very well they're much more likely to try to help you out.
From what I understand their lawfare approach is using japanese software patent law, they have notably not tried to do the same using trademark or copyright infringement.
No one is looking at Digimon and going "Hey, that's Pokemon!" -- looking at Palworld's creatures for the uninitiated, it looks so very much like Pokemon creatures that most people I know have confused it for Pokemon.
There's a HUGE difference between being influenced by, and blatantly copying the inspiration and design. It took Nintendo decades to come up with creature designs, and Palworld less than a year - and they could do that because they likely went through each creature one-by-one and said, "How can we make it just so slightly different?"
No one is looking at Digimon and saying it looks like Pokemon now, but in the 90s they sure as heck were. People's mothers (ie the key demographic for "the uninitiated") commonly confused one for the other, even the TV show. This is no longer the case purely because Digimon is far less popular.
Bearing in mind pretty much all Pokemon designs follow the rule of "what if a mythical animal existed in our art style", it is in fact shockingly easy to accidentally ape a Pokemon design just by cartoonifying mythos.
This is incidentally also true of Pokemon, who were accused of ripping off Dragon Quest when the first games started coming out. Does anyone remember that at this point?
It's not absurd, once you remember that autistic people are human beings with feelings.
Edit: Sort of shocked that I am having to spell this out to all the "but embryos..." posters, but the backlash is coming from autistic human people with feelings. I was not insinuating some anti abortion sentiment.
I am a diabetic. It doesn't make me a worse person, but it does make my life more difficult. If I had the ability to screen for diabetes for my child, I would do so. Because the fewer things that make my child's life harder, the better.
You're making an argument just to make an argument. Being a woman has both positives and negatives; there's tradeoffs. The same is not true of being a diabetic. My guess would be that most people believe there are very few benefits to being autistic to offset the negatives.
Yes, but practically speaking if you constrain to the set of people who would go through with assortive mating in today's society, AND are high IQ (and don't think it's a fluke, i.e. they think it's heritable), AND have no relatives that are autistic, AND aren't related to certain Jewish populations, how many candidates are you going to have left?
And I'm not talking about diagnosed autism either, e.g. do you have/did you have a weird uncle?
Edit: uh, the Jewish part's for Tay-Sachs and some other traits, that should have been obvious from the "certain Jewish populations" part.
Given the chronological proximity to the real hurricane force winds in the US right now, seems fair to me to assume someone at the weather data source was testing how these values might propagate/display and the test values escaped containment?
Ah I realize my first comment is maybe not written so well. I meant to convey, it looks to me that some irrationally high dummy testing values (put there because we're seeing historically high winds and they wish to test that behaviour) were accidentally put into the production data source.
I went looking for the outright rage you're talking about and I don't see any signs of it, given your small collection of replies with a decent number of them flagged are you sure that this isn't projection on your behalf?
He asked me if I needed assistance getting out of bed in the morning. This is a pretty pejorative attack. Meanwhile I am being flagged for just asking questions. Clearly hacker news has become biased towards hyper sensitive passive aggressive nerds. By the way, going through someone's comment history is the signature of the passive aggressive nerd, making you a typical passive aggressive nerd.
Characterizing my asking a question - "How is long Covid different from hypochondria?" - as an angry outburst is further passive aggressive nerd behavior.
I don't know the answers to all the questions, but "is accessibility just that hard" is a firm, concrete, YES.
Here's some real world examples, modals. If you are not a vision impaired user, you can see what's going on when you're presented with a white box containing ui components swimming in a sea of "don't touch this bit" grey.
If you're using a screen reader there's no guarantee that you'll receive any of that information. When your screen reader controls tab through the UI elements and you land back at the top of the box, will your particular screen reader report that to you? Will it list the available interactable elements? Will it list them in the same order as the other screen readers? How about on phone? How about on Mac? Will your screen reader and browser report the inputs right, or will it silently allow the user to fall out of the modal and back into the rest of the site?
When it comes to accessibility you can't trust that the OS, browser and the screen reader are cooperative, or even that they'll do something sane in the right situation.
In 2019 I had to log a bug with VoiceOver + Safari because a negative CSS margin could cause screen readers to read RTL text blocks out of order. Users with unimpaired vision would see "9/10/2019" and on the screen reader you would hear "ten slash nine slash two-thousand-and-nineteen", as a stopgap measure we had to set the text aria-hidden and put in an invisible p tag there with the correctly ordered text so screen readers wouldn't choke on it.
All this to say, sometimes when you see some jank code relating to accessibility there really isn't a better way to do it. Even if you dumped everything, turned the codebase upside down and focused on accessibility first you'd see stuff inexplicably break the moment JAWS or VoiceOver updates.
reply