It’s easy to feel powerless these days. It feels like so much is out of our hands: Conflicts and fascism on the rise, threatening of human rights, especially of LGBTQIA+ people, a lackluster pandemic response.
There’s not a lot we can change, but going to vote. Elect people that align with your values. Re-elect them if they prove to be trustworthy. Elections can feel like doing nothing, but they are your direct way to change politics.
The ability of the people on the internet to get outraged over the same three “we license the data you give us in a way that allows our service to do what you want it to do” sentences is astounding.
FYI when I’m not interacting with you like normal, you might be at a conference. I don’t want to worry about you, so I might have muted you for the next few days. I do that for my own mental health.
@DanielGoransson So which SC irrelevant for accessibility? And the “meets WCAG 100% but is completely impossible to use” UI I’d like to see. (Also, of course in that case oh would go beyond WCAG, too, in advice. But IMHO always also WCAG.)
@DanielGoransson Or “it’s so bad this UI can’t be made accessible without compromise”, but that has nothing to do with WCAG then.Thats fundamental design badness.
Accessibility tests are much easier if you go by success criterion and write up failures of them instead of identifying possible issues and then assign SCs to it.
And it gives you a handy guide to keep track of what you already tested and what not. Try to flip your approach and see if you think it’s easier, too!
@christianp I often hear it from people, especially who start out. They often also use screen readers for testing (which I don’t think are great testing tools by themselves).
That you can do better than the minimum guidance of WCAG IS THE WHOLE POINT.
It’s not wiggle room that you can do better.
You can drive your tires to the absolute minimum of what is allowed, but you can also have more profile on them. It’s totally ok. That doesn’t mean there is wiggle room.