Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cxr 934 days ago
> In other words, there is no reason to use or have made <strong>, since the end result was just <b> again

So waitasecond, <strong> was created, airheaded developers of WYSIWYG plugins messed it up, and that retroactively means there is no reason for it to have ever been created? That's a real pretzel you're twisting.

How about: "Programmers of WYSIWYG widgets should just stop messing things up, i.e. sabotaging the efforts of the blind and other people who use/develop screenreaders—so we can finally achieve the accessibility wins that <strong> was created to solve"?

> Screen readers could have just done what they do with <strong>

No, they can't. Not in the sense of, "There's a problem that exists. We want to solve it." Your proposal is to ignore the problem and do nothing. You can apply that approach to anything. (Heck, why even have screenreaders at all? People who are blind or dyslexic are shut out from the Web? Let's just do nothing.)

> ...and saved us all a lot of trouble

Saved who a lot of trouble? What trouble?