From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by c5ff346549e7 (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DA705D5 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:03:28 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,300,1635199200"; d="scan'208";a="16881625" Received: from prod-listesu18.inria.fr (HELO sympa.inria.fr) ([128.93.162.160]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 19 Jan 2022 20:03:27 +0100 Received: by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix, from userid 20132) id 30261E0C63; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 20:03:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D201CE00C9 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 20:03:24 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,300,1635199200"; d="scan'208";a="16881597" Received: from prajna.paris.inria.fr ([128.93.65.171]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Jan 2022 20:03:25 +0100 Received: from shindere by prajna.paris.inria.fr with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAGEu-000HE7-Gs for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 20:03:24 +0100 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 20:03:24 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?S=C3=A9bastien?= Hinderer To: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: caml-list@inria.fr References: <714c3a8d-25c8-c91e-ae01-46bf00920ffd@baturin.org> <20220117143005.qso775afaro24bi4@posteo.de> <467aab49-e503-57e0-0799-a40a9c0b878d@baturin.org> <20220117173608.qpufro64pbpfny5z@posteo.de> <696b25b0-7567-0b1b-4203-9f53634ca998@orbitalfox.eu> <20220119175121.zrug7wumxfsxl62x@posteo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20220119175121.zrug7wumxfsxl62x@posteo.de> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ask questions on the mailing lists too Reply-To: =?utf-8?Q?S=C3=A9bastien?= Hinderer X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Sequence: 18670 Errors-To: caml-list-owner@inria.fr Precedence: list Precedence: bulk Sender: caml-list-request@inria.fr X-no-archive: yes List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Hello, Sam Kuper (2022/01/19 17:51 +0000): > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 05:31:39PM +0100, Sébastien Hinderer wrote: > > Simon Cruanes (2022/01/18 15:55 +0000): > >> By the way Sam, I opened https://discuss.ocaml.org/about in a TUI > >> browser and it looked kind of ok. > > That suggests to me that Discourse relies on browser-sniffing (probably > based on the user-agent string) to decide what to serve to the browser. > > So, users whose browsers (or browser-settings) don't match the Discourse > devs' assumptions may be served non-accessible page content. > > > Did you manage to create an account, via a text-mode browser, btw? If you are asking me: I didn't even try that. I use Firefox with Orca under Linux. I uselynx (text-mode browser) only for simple google searches and for Wikipedia, almost all the time I end-up using Firefox. I don't feel at ease with it because I feel too far away frmo the information (it's hard to explain, sorry), but that's what gives the best user experience, I think. > > Well thei=re is no real equivalence between the ability to view a page > > in a text-mode browser and its accessibility. NOt even an implication > > in one direction or another. > > For people who use text-mode browsers for accessibility reasons, it's > crucial that websites work in those browsers. I am not sure such people exist nowadays. The visually impaired persons follow, for most of them, the general tendency and use Windows or Mac with screen-rendering solutions (NVDA and Jaws under Windows, VoiceOver under MacOSX). Even among the minority of blind persons using Linux, most of them work in the GUI. And for the minority of the minority who uses the console, most of the time they do run X just to run Firefox. I belong to this last category. > (Likewise, for people who use screen-readers, it's crucial that websites > work with screen-readers. Mutatis mutandis.) But working with screen-readers and being Java-script-free have become two quite different things nowadays. Think about stuff like ARIA. > > Similarly, I don't think it's expected, nowadays, that a website is > > browsable without JS support for it to conform to WCAG. > > WCAG 1 explicitly required websites to be usable without scripts. Yes but now the reference is WCAG 2.1, see https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/ > WCAG 2 fudges the issue (due to pressure from Big Tech, IIRC), but very > strongly implies it. > > The UK Government says: > > Some users turn off features in their browsers deliberately. You > should respect their decision and make sure those users can still > use your service. > > https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/using-progressive-enhancement#do-not-assume-users-turn-off-css-or-javascript I, to, would prefer to be able to continue using lynx. I'm way more comfortable than with Firefox. But there are so many aother batles that I don't feel brave enough to invest energy in this one, nowadays. But I am glad others do. Sébastien.