|
|
|
|
|
by andybak
5331 days ago
|
|
God, yes. So much of what's repeated about the benefits of semantic markup are pie-in-the-sky. The link to the IRC logs in that piece was fascinating. To see Mark Pilgrim - who was always at the pragmatic end of things when it came to the accessibility debate - recanting many of the positions he takes in 'Dive into Accessibility' tells you how little of the things that we've been promised for years have actually amounted to anything. Don't believe anyone who tells you anything about markup best practice until they can point you to a shipping user-agent that will make use of it and introduce you to a living human being who will experience some tangible benefit. |
|
Here are the user agents that make use of it:
- ChromeVox: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/kgejglhpjiefppelpm...
- NVDA: http://www.nvda-project.org/
- Window-Eyes: http://www.gwmicro.com/window-eyes/
- VoiceOver: http://www.apple.com/accessibility/voiceover/
- JAWS: http://www.freedomscientific.com/products/fs/jaws-product-pa...
- Orca: http://live.gnome.org/Orca/
And two dozen others. And here a few living human beings that benefit from it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mwoe7OjIxpw, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pntGp00HHr8, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAw0SIkXm1o, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBzSXIEusoU, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zSTJwIULYU, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_TFHqIHBqM
285 million people are visually impaired in the world. Putting aside the SEO, meta-data and other discussions, I think this is a pretty meaningful argument in favor of doing it right.