←back to thread

Against Best Practices

(www.arp242.net)
279 points ingve | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.207s | source
1. graypegg ◴[] No.42177598[source]
I have an on-going topic with friends at work about what accessibility "means".

It annoys me to no end when devs talk about some specific technical change "increasing accessibility". The accessibility best practices are used as a checklist where more checks = more accessibility points = better. It results in people gaming the score with meaningless repetitive metadata or low-impact tweaks, rather than actually improving the descriptive/alternative/touch/visual interface. Usually never even trying any alternative method of interacting with an interface.

The best practice is "always include metadata", but it leaves off "... that adds context about the element rather than noise, and integrates with a surrounding application that uses consistent metadata labelling. Remember, this is a portion of a complete descriptive interface someone has to use."

These best practices being driven into people's brains verbatim means conversations devolve into inane on-or-off taxonomy discussions like "is this colour accessible?" or "have we added accessibility? Do you need a ticket for that?" where pushing back isn't seen as caring about users, it's seen as being "against accessibility".

https://graypegg.com/2023/11/25/the-private-definition-of-ac...