Difference between revisions of "Talk:Accessibility Testing"
From Dreamwidth Notes
(→Google Chrome: new section) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | CAPTCHA use in the code | + | == Discussion of Document == |
| + | |||
| + | I had originally included the following on the main Accessibility Testing page, but after reconsidering and grokking this wiki thing a little better, I now realize that this is a more appropriate place. --[[User:Textish|Textish]] 02:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | :: I'm not sure that qualifying the need to make the site accessible to all, not just certain disabled users, is important here. I think this document works fine without these statements. As a disabled person myself, I can see how these could be taken wrongly by a group of users that could potentially contribute much to this project. I'm going to let the original author make this decision, though. (Or simply delete this comment, if it's felt to be inappropriate.) --[[User:Textish|Textish]] 01:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == CAPTCHA use in the code == | ||
* Journal Creation | * Journal Creation | ||
| Line 12: | Line 17: | ||
I wonder whether Google's Chrome browser should also be tested or whether it isn't widespread enough to warrant that. (I use it for some things, FWIW.) | I wonder whether Google's Chrome browser should also be tested or whether it isn't widespread enough to warrant that. (I use it for some things, FWIW.) | ||
| − | + | :: I'm sure that in the future (not flying car future, but soonish) Google Chrome will be a solid contender in the Browser Wars. Testing it is probably a good idea. One issue that I think is important, however, is identifying which accessibility issues would be better addressed by the developer of new applications/technologies. I confess that I'm a bit of a neophyte in the world of Web Accessibility, but as a user with a disability I really think that Dreamwidth as a whole will be better off tackling only accessibility issues that are primarily cross-platform. Perhaps as the community grows, someone (or a group) could advocate for developers to make needed accessibility changes. This is a lofty goal, but I guess my simple suggestion is -- for now -- that the Dreamwidth community doesn't tackle issues that are quite obviously Someone Else's Problem. --[[User:Textish|Textish]] 02:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC) | |
Also FWIW, its text size increase seems to affect only text, not images. -- [[User:Pne|Pne]] 08:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC) | Also FWIW, its text size increase seems to affect only text, not images. -- [[User:Pne|Pne]] 08:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 02:51, 17 February 2009
Discussion of Document
I had originally included the following on the main Accessibility Testing page, but after reconsidering and grokking this wiki thing a little better, I now realize that this is a more appropriate place. --Textish 02:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that qualifying the need to make the site accessible to all, not just certain disabled users, is important here. I think this document works fine without these statements. As a disabled person myself, I can see how these could be taken wrongly by a group of users that could potentially contribute much to this project. I'm going to let the original author make this decision, though. (Or simply delete this comment, if it's felt to be inappropriate.) --Textish 01:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
CAPTCHA use in the code
- Journal Creation
- Lost Info
- Possibility to show to select users on comments (none, anon, not member, not friends, everyone)
- Validating an OpenID account
- Possibly Support (if user is logged out and its enabled site-side)
Exor674 17:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Google Chrome
I wonder whether Google's Chrome browser should also be tested or whether it isn't widespread enough to warrant that. (I use it for some things, FWIW.)
- I'm sure that in the future (not flying car future, but soonish) Google Chrome will be a solid contender in the Browser Wars. Testing it is probably a good idea. One issue that I think is important, however, is identifying which accessibility issues would be better addressed by the developer of new applications/technologies. I confess that I'm a bit of a neophyte in the world of Web Accessibility, but as a user with a disability I really think that Dreamwidth as a whole will be better off tackling only accessibility issues that are primarily cross-platform. Perhaps as the community grows, someone (or a group) could advocate for developers to make needed accessibility changes. This is a lofty goal, but I guess my simple suggestion is -- for now -- that the Dreamwidth community doesn't tackle issues that are quite obviously Someone Else's Problem. --Textish 02:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Also FWIW, its text size increase seems to affect only text, not images. -- Pne 08:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
