Accessibility
!a11y@programming.dev is a community for discussing digital accessibility, sharing techniques and best practices, and talking about accessibility experiences; both good and bad.
Guidelines
- Please keep submissions on topic and try to share high quality content.
- Follow all instance-wide rules, which can be found on the sidebar here: programming.dev
- Don't be a jerk. Just because something you post doesn't explicitly break a rule does not entitle you to post whatever you want, and mods will remove any posts or comments we consider to have been made in bad faith.
- Don't editorialize titles. When sharing something, try to keep the title of whatever article you are sharing, unless it is clearly a clickbait title, and you wish to substitute a simple matter-of-fact title. Please do remove website and author names from the title.
What is Digital Accessibility?
Digital accessibility is the practice of removing barriers that prevent interaction with, or access to, digital systems by people with disabilities. This involves designing and developing websites, mobile applications, software, hardware, and other digital platforms in a way that they can be used by individuals with a range of abilities, including those with visual, auditory, physical, speech, cognitive, and neurological disabilities.
Digital accessibility not only benefits those with disabilities but also enhances the overall user experience, making digital content more usable and understandable for all. In many jurisdictions, it's a legal requirement under disability discrimination laws.
How does one improve digital accessibility in their products?
Key components of digital accessibility include accessible website design, multimedia with features like captions or transcripts, properly formatted digital documents, and accessible software and apps. It also extends to hardware design.
Other Accessibility Related communities:
Useful Resources
- Mozilla Developer Network Accessibility Reference
- UK Government's Guidance and tools for digital accessibility
view the rest of the comments
This looks like it's stealing someone else's work, and got it wrong at the same time.
Original work: https://petervelnl.blogspot.com/2021/11/vision-encoding-language.html
Getting it wrong: Red should be the Chevron as a metaphor for fire, Yellow should be Circle as a metaphor for Sun, Blue should be line as a metaphor for the sky + horizon.
It's more likely that both are derived from ColorADD, but the idea is also simple enough, conceptually, that they all could have thought of it independently.
The problem with requiring that your symbols are metaphors for things is that those things may not relate to the context in which you are using the symbols. At which point it just adds confusion to say that the yellow symbol represents the sun.
Additionally, people are never going to agree on what should represent what, as you yourself demonstrate; the author explicitly rejects that the blue symbol should be the metaphor for sky, yet for you it apparently felt like the best choice:
I'm not a 100% sure it does, the choice of symbols looks a bit suspicious but it could be independently invented from ColorAdd idea like the one you linked. Symbolism is hard to standardise, maybe a chevron for blue has another meaning for the author
Edit: or more realistically, they had this problem and decided to solve it with AI and publish their solution for everyone without checking if the solution already existed and was partially copied by AI. That's the feeling I get from the repository at least