Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by aaron695 3621 days ago
FFS can we stop spending billions on designing around screen readers and fucking spend billions on good screen readers.
7 comments

Even if that happened it would be years before people upgraded. People using assistive technology tend to be more resistant to changing their setup than one would expect as it can be difficult to debug failed upgrades. It can also be extremely expensive, for example the leading Windows screenreader JAWS costs $900 per install.

And, like the article says, even leaving aside screenreader users this has a practical benefit for many users. If your prose is complex enough that you have to use a Latin abbreviation for precision you’re probably in need of a content designer to simplify it.

How does a screen reader translate FFS?
Abbreviations on the web can be expanded using the abbr tag:

<abbr title="Fat Finger Syndrome">FFS</abbr>

This also helps reduce ambiguity about the meaning of an acronym, improving the communication of semantic intent.

That said, it appears that expansion of <abbr> isn't consistently supported[1].

I suspect most screenreaders would simply say "Eff Eff Ess".

[1] http://www.powermapper.com/tests/screen-readers/labelling/ac...

> I suspect most screenreaders would simply say "Eff Eff Ess".

Correct, thankfully. I don't really see a use case for screen reader-specific usage of the abr tag. If everybody else has to read "FFS", possibly having to look it up on Google to know what on earth it is, why wouldn't I also? Although I suspect that as a sighted user, you can mouse-over some text marked up with abr and see the expanded form.

this doesn't address the complaint that non-native english speakers may not know what `e.g.` and `etc.` mean.
Presumably native latin speakers will feel right at home. :-)
I think they can't think of all situations (like people writing eg instead of e.g. or eff eff ess)
This would be my concern -- potentially half-assed engineered products significantly influencing nationwide (worldwide?) standards that suddenly many developers must now accompany. It'll be like supporting IE 7-9 all over again.
On GOV.UK we have high six figures of each of IE8 and IE9 per month, so we do support them already. It’s about user needs.
Supporting simple screen readers is a good thing, because it precludes much of the user-hostile crap that web ‘designers’ spew.
I don't think this will cost that much...