// 5 Excuses for Discrimination in Web Development
// May 14th, 2008 & filed under Accessibility
Not to be confused with Usability, Accessibility is all about giving equal access to everyone.
It has become a bit of a buzz-word over the last few years, in all areas of society. In the U.K. for example, there is now legislation in place, which demands certain design specifications for all new buildings, i.e.
- Doorways must have a clear opening width 800mm
- Corridors must have a clear width 1.2m
- Door handles must be 1m from the ground
- Light switches are to be placed at 1.3m from the ground
- Power sockets must be between a height of 350-500mm
All this for a minority of the population. Isn’t is all just a little over-the-top?
Far from it. In fact, many reasons have made it vital.
In a similar way, we must now remember that the Internet is no longer a place just for nerds and geeks. Grandpa now has a Gmail account, and is selling antique clocks on eBay. It’s critical therefore, that everyone is catered for.
However, if most were honest, accessibility is still something that lies in a dark corner of our minds. As long as it works for the majority, then we’re happy.
Let’s be realistic too; it’s almost impossible to predict, or figure out how a site will display in every possible browser, in every possible screen size and resolution, and how each mind expects something to work.
In fact, why is it that web designers get all the blame when a site isn’t accessible in all browsers? Shouldn’t those behind Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, etc, all be forced into strict standards so that they all display the same?
That said, we should still be making more of an effort, but why don’t we?
1. Few Are Leading The Way
A lot of what we do comes down to peer pressure, and in the area of web accessibility, there really isn’t all that much. If there was more pressure to conform, it stands to reason that more would make the effort, or spend more money in bringing their sites up-to-scratch.
2. There Are No Complaints
If you’re not aware of a problem, it’s going to make it pretty difficult to rectify. Like I said, it’s nigh impossible to predict how something will work or display in every possible scenario, so we rely heavily sometimes on feedback. If there are no complaints, nothing is changed.
3. Our Tests Are Not Thorough
Making sure a site displays correctly in certain browsers and resolutions, is not where accessibility begins and ends. Do we make sure that the language is easy to understand? Do the anchor texts to hyperlinks make sense? Do all images have appropriate ALT tags?
I am as guilty as anyone, but by right, shouldn’t these things should be checked?
4. It’s No Fun
If it looks fine, and works well for the majority, there’s no fun in spending more time and money to work on something that, for the most part, no one will notice.
For example, many online publishers don’t want to be restricted to using actual words. They would rather write like they talk on the street.
Having to worry about how it’ll be interpreted by the hardware and software the disabled are using, is not what many are considering as they write.
5. There’s No (Immediate) Benefit
Just because someone takes the time to make their site more accessible, doesn’t mean they’re going to reap heaps of benefits. True, search engines will probably find it easier to index a more accessible site, but that doesn’t guarantee the number one spot, or even the first page.
If it’s going to cost someone more money to make their site accessible, they will be more likely to place that money into buying links, and other forms of advertising.
Conclusion
There are numerous articles and websites addressing different aspects of accessibilty. However, there is a real lack of good material telling us how to make our sites more accessible.
It would be nice to see more mainstream, and popular websites leading the way, placing pressure on everyone else to conform. If that doesn’t happen, it’s going to be a long, slow process before the Internet becomes truly accessible to everyone.
Did you enjoy this article? Please share it -
You may also like to read the following:
11 comments...What do you think?
Trackbacks...
- Discover The Best Of The Web In May 2008 - Opensource, Free and Useful Online Resources for Designers and Developers
- Best Design Articles from May 2008
- DON’T MISS: The Best Design Articles from May 2008 | Dalton Trent's Blog
- DON’T MISS: The Best Design Articles from May 2008 | Dalton Trent's Blog
Interesting read, Armen. Of course I think it goes without saying that all web designers/developers should be concious of accessibility when working on projects, but I also think accessibility requires a pragmatic approach sometimes.
A coulple of examples:
Accessibility is often at odds with cutting edge web technologies. Therefore if your intention behind the project is to push boundaries and with new technologies then accessibility may need to take a back seat.
Also, accessibility often is at odds with itself! For example a highly intereactive flash-based interface with video and drag’n'drop flashy stuff is probably not what one would consider accessible. However, for someone with learning difficulties this kind of approach may be the best way of engaging them?
Its not just accessability which has the problem with web design, its the whole industry.
Until web industry is reconised with official country standards not stand alone w3c standards the problem will stay.
In Australia for example, to be a hairdresser, you need a certificate saying you are but to be a web designer, all you need is DreamWeaver and an Internet connection.
Great points made here, guys!
Aaron,
You’re totally right about the need for pragmatism. Your second example is a classic!
To be honest, I’m not well versed in the developments of accessibility. However, my sites on the whole, are probably more accessible than the average slap-dash site on the web. Then again, I’m not developing websites which need custom solutions like branded embedded flash video players, etc.
Jermayn,
Your point about using the title ‘web designer’ (or a designer of any kind I suppose), is very true.
Here’s another example. My wife needed a degree, and then needs to register annually with the BDA, in order for her to have the title, ‘dietitian’. The degree isn’t enough, she needs to be registered by the Association.
However, any man and their dog can be a ‘nutritionist’. You watch out in the media for how many more ‘nutritionists’ there are, in comparison to ‘dietitians’. Nutritionists can spout any nonsense they like, but the advice from a dietitian has to be officially lab tested, and government recognised.
Now how on earth did I end up getting into all that?
Great article, this is definitely something I’ve struggled with, especially with the accessibility killer-roadblock that every web designer/developer has probably battled with - IE6.
I’m still a baby in the industry, and having grown up developing for earlier versions of firefox, it seems at first that CSS just /works/.. And that becomes clear as day that that isn’t necessarily the case as soon as a lot of pages with new-fangled ideas like using divs instead of tables gets loaded in IE6. The more CSS I learn, the more things come up that just don’t work in IE6 without having to learn the CSS that will fix the new CSS I just learned. Not that learning new things should be complained about, but sometimes it seems like a bit of a waste of time to be learning all this new material to make things work in an old, malfunctioning browser that god willing should be phased out as soon as possible anyways.
I wish there was some miracle that could occur in the way of obliterating IE6 from our lives, but I think practice, experience, and commitment to learning good coding practices is the only way.
Also, browsershots (http://browsershots.org/) is a gem for at least making sure your layout doesn’t look like a big turd in browsers you can’t test yourself. Takes a while to make it through the queue, but it’s much more helpful than netrenderer. Definitely a tool worth using if you haven’t discovered it yet!
Anyway, I love your blog but I’ve never commented before (A bit shy about sharing my website URL I think!), but keep up the great posts, you’ve always got great insight!
-Lydia
Lydia,
Sorry for the delayed reply.
IE6 is the thorn in the side of every developer - fact! We all hate it. But, the reality is, it’s far from being a browser we can forget about. On my personal site, I deliberately didn’t make it IE6 friendly. Why? Just because. If someone is still using a site which can’t work with transparency, then that’s their problem.
However, this site uses transparent images, but I made sure they work in IE6, simply because the impression this site gives is different than my personal site.
I’m glad you’re liking the articles. I like your straight-forward website. Have you ever thought of adding a blog?
Armen-
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about adding a blog but I’ve just recently brought the website live and I’m in a bit of a battle creating my own online identity, so blogging has so far been put on the back burner.
I personally feel more suited to a clean, minimalistic sort of design approach, but I worry that it’s not eye-catching enough as a design website (especially in comparison to the designs featured on websites like best of web etc). I feel comfortable with it now, but then I’ve heard that if a new design fits completely in your comfort zone, you’re not being bold enough! Quite the dilemma, but I think it’s the something that shows itself more often than not whether on client projects, or personal =)
I couldn’t agree more - too often accessibilty is sacrificed for apparently pleasing visual design. Part of the problem is that ‘accessibility’ is seen as an issue that affects a small group of people labelled the ‘disabled’, and, as such, is a minority concern. However, accessibilty affects an incredibly broad range of people: through simple ageing our cognitive, motor and visual faculties deteriorate, while certain technical limitations may make websites inaccessible to some (if you use an 800X600 monitor, for example).
Another problem is that there isn’t a central, accessible set of guidelines to follow (which is kind of ironic).