Try launching the instance of Chrome with `--disable-web-security` and `--disable-features=IsolateOrigins,site-per-process` options. I use these when launching Chrome via Playwright, and CAPTCHAs seemed to work fine several months ago.
The live demo[1] is completely unusable for people relying on assistive technology like screen readers and speech recognition, plus anyone using alternative input modalities like the keyboard. Do you have accessibility on your roadmap, to ensure that you're not encouraging users of your library to exclude a large percentage of the world's population?
Do you know what doesn't matter? Articles about whether commit messages do or don't. What matters is the art of documenting things, somewhere, and that place should be the one that works for your team. If it's commit messages today, great. If that changes in the future, great. If it's somewhere else entirely already, also fine.
> nobody wanted to be the first person to leave the office, even on Friday.
This doesn't sound like a healthy symptom of a positive workplace culture. I guarantee that for some people, this perspective could be flipped on its head, and rephrased as a fear of being seen as the first person to leave. Other parts of the article reaffirm that, e.g.:
> My heart would beat out of my chest before heading into an exec review.
> Once, my manager asked me to reconsider the vacation I had been planning because my team needed me. “If you go, who will cover your work?”
If this is what gets your juices flowing right now, good for you. But personally? I work hard, hard enough to justify a vacation without the accompanying guilt trip, and with sufficient diligence to make a difference and explain my decisions to leadership. Then I go home.
They do, accessibility being one of them. Rendering math in the way you describe makes it difficult, or impossible, to understand for all sorts of audiences, including those relying on screen reading software.
> All4 is one of the buggiest platforms of all of the big channels.
Interesting viewpoint. While using the service on iOS, with an active ad-free subscription, I haven't noticed any of the issues you mention. Other than sponsorship unfortunately still being required for a small subset of programming. But other than that, the app has been a pleasure to use, far more so than the streaming app from Channel 5 which seeks my position each time I press the Pause button. I now generally rate the UX of All4 above the BBC iPlayer, which was the gold standard for a while.
> I will often get a suggestion on how to fix an issue, fix it, and then someone else will test my fix and give me a totally different suggestion on how to fix it. It's infuriating.
Polite indication that this is a problem with your organisation, not accessibility or accessibility work. The same issues can occur with design and other areas where everybody and their grandmother has an opinion; it's up to a good org to manage all of those opinions and expertise in an appropriate fashion. If they aren't, and this is making it harder for you to create accessible experiences, you should raise it with someone.
> new screen readers and new web APIs come out and and more.
New web APIs, for sure. But the screen reader market is not fast moving, in terms of new software being adopted. The line-up of the most used three screen readers (NVDA, JAWS and VoiceOver) has not changed in over a decade, despite the individual software applications themselves undergoing changes, and of course the market share of each one increasing and decreasing over time.
> Do we seriously expect every small non-technical business eking out a living with a small store to be experts on every facet of accessibility?
No, but I also don't expect such a business to be up on the latest in security, PCI compliance, GDPR conformance and more. For that reason, they are probably either:
1. engaging a web design/development agency; and/or
2. using a pre-defined platform, like Shopify.
In the former case, I do expect anyone making money from website building to at least give accessibility some thought. For the latter, Shopify is one of the businesses you describe, as a "large tech company who can write a blank check for a large team of full-time developers who can work full time on nothing but accessibility". As such, they absolutely should be setting up small business owners for success, by making their out-of-the-box themes, widgets, flows, etc. reasonably accessible to the widest possible audience.
> Do you have an example of a website with a comment hierarchy that works well for you?
I'm not the original commenter, but I am a screen reader user who works in accessibility.
Unfortunately, I don't have too many good examples; the problem of hierarchical commenting systems being difficult to navigate is common across the web. There is a Reddit client for iOS, Dystopia[1], that does this extremely well for users of the built-in screen reader, VoiceOver[2], by allowing entire threads/subthreads to be collapsed and/or skipped over. On the web, you'd want to look into using hierarchical headings, nested lists and the like, to allow the structure to be conveyed semantically. HN is inexcusably bad at this, as there isn't a single heading anywhere on the site.
> I have my gripes with Google, but from working there, I can definitely give them props for how much they cared about accessibility.
Accessibility at Google suffers in the same way as most UX-related things suffer at Google. Namely, the fact that everything is constantly reinvented from scratch, rather than there being one unified way to do it. As a screen reader user, I can say that in some Google products, there can be instances of what, on the surface, should be exactly the same component, but was apparently developed in multiple different ways. This leads to the constant need to work out how accessible each instance is (and e.g. what keyboard support it has), even though I dealt with the same UI pattern minutes ago.
> if there's a link on a website that the screen reader cannot see, a blind person won't report that as an accessibility issue because they won't even know it's there.
This is highly variable. As a screen reader user who works in accessibility with a software engineering focus, I don't consider a test to be complete if I've only evaluated what the page exposes to the accessibility API. Assessing the rendered DOM by hand, testing on different viewports where controls may be slightly or completely different, etc., are just as critical to the testing process as trying to simply use the page. But, I recognise that there are many accessibility testers out there without such a technical focus, and it is true to say that they may gloss over something if it is completely missing in the accessibility tree.
It grinds my gears that "tamale" is on this list. The singular of tamales, in Spanish, is "tamal". God forbid English speakers have to remember to drop one syllable.
There's no denying that money can go further in Mexico. But there are two aspects of nuance missing from this article.
First: there are often options that cost more than $5, in some cases significantly more. Some of these will cater to tourists, and/or locals with deep pockets who will pay more as a status symbol/reputational thing, and hence may not be worth the extra outlay from a quality perspective. Other times, paying more really does get you better service. Determining the difference between the two can be a challenge.
Second: because of the low local wages mentioned in the post, that $5 service may be executed by someone wishing to save you money in whatever way possible. This is completely well-meaning, of course. But when the electrician, plumber or whoever else comes up with the cheapest possible solution to your problem, you end up spending $5 over and over again, rather than just paying more upfront. In the worst case scenarios, the cheaper solutions may be unsafe or otherwise suboptimal.
Do your research, and gain good local contacts. You'll be fine, if not sometimes exhausted at the amount of specialist knowledge you're taking on just to increase the chances of having a job done well. But $5 is not always going to buy you what $50 or $500 would in the US.
> Why not just have an image of a menu and a box where you type the order.
Because then the menu wouldn't be readable, searchable, or adaptable by many people, including blind, low vision or dyslexic users. Meanwhile, the people who could read it could type any old freeform nonsense into the box... nobody has to care about spelling on a phonecall or proper ordering system.
> That's only if you want to take advantage of the hydration and client side routing.
I feel it would be doable for a framework to determine which links should be client-side routed versus not. Or, failing that (or in conjunction with it), provide a way for developers to indicate that information, without reinventing a cornerstone of the web and HTML mark-up from scratch.
This page talks a lot about knowledge that is transferable, e.g.:
> We want your experience with Remix to transfer to web development generally.
But then, you opened the quickstart tutorial[1], and the first bit of mark-up is:
<Link to="/posts">Posts</Link>
Uh... okay. Not only is this not how you create links in HTML, but it also repurposes an element that actually does exist in HTML[2] for a completely different purpose. Of course, as to not conflict with that element, I now have to remember to type the L in uppercase, which is another aspect that doesn't carry over to HTML either.
It seems the amount they're willing to reinvent is limited to JavaScript.
> Out of curiosity, what does it look like to not-suck at math?
To me, it looks like the rest of your comment, wherein you casually mention constants, theorems, topological homology and other concepts that don't even come to mind for many people who self-identify as being bad at maths (as I do).
As long as those users aren't disabled.