Assistive technology testing on any site is important. I know that.

But effectively being demoted from someone who contributes content to a site to someone who simply tests the final product with assistive tech because Gutenberg required when Gutenberg is part of the project I’ve invested years in and accessibility is an afterthought for the top dog of said project is a thing I am never going to get used to.

I’ll get over this particular instance and steal myself for the next one but if I ever get the opportunity it’s no-mouse plus no-monitor plus screen reader plus Gutenberg challenge for said top dog.

For the entire next possible WordCamp US.

This is crap and while yeah we should all be professional bla bla bla this is personal and I’m not apologizing for it or even here for putting a positive spin on this.

Current status: Banging on the Twentytwenty theme with all the screen readers and helping @whiskeydragon1 set up his .org account because he’s also testing. #ScreenReaderTagTeam #AllTheProps #5FTF and we haz some patches coming.

It’s very nice to have someone in real time and not remote or chat-based to bounce ideas off of.

#WCUS I’m glad that @RianKinney asked that question regarding accessibility and other policies.

It would be so cool if we could treat as an “everything-is-awesome” moment and not as a must-do.

Problem with that approach was aptly illustrated by Gutenberg being released in an inaccessible state.

I’d like to say I’m surprised we’re apparently still doing this despite $31,000 worth of audit, but I’m not.

Yes, it would be totally awesome if we didn’t have to say “you must” with regard to accessibility, but unfortunately the makers of the web have consistently demonstrated that that is literally the only way anything gets done.

For the first few years of my career as an accessibility practitioner, I worked on a series of projects whose final reports heavily focused on only the positive, including asking testers with disabilities to talk about what they liked, even on seriously inaccessible sites.

That approach wasn’t just partially ineffective, it was one hundred percent ineffective.

Absolutely none of the sites reported on were fixed, or even improved.

Those sites are still broken.

That’s what happens when you spend your time objecting to accessibility must-dos because they’re must-dos instead of realizing that, yes Matt, there really are things that developers and designers have consistently demonstrated they will not do unless you basically force them to do those things.

All of this also goes for privacy and codes of conduct.

Why do we have to keep saying this?

#WCUS Question: Do you find it easier to read websites/pages that are multicolumn or single-column?

It doesn’t matter to me as a screen reader user, because everything is always a single column, but I’m thinking that if a page is one column, never-ending scrolling can become an issue.

On the other hand, there could be a reason that multiple columns could also be an issue for people who use their vision to read.

Thoughts?

Everybody’s new #WCUS selfies and headshots were making me jealous and agrevating the fomo, so I decided to bite the bullet and put some work into customerservant.com

I’m just focusing on a few simple things today because, well, I need some easy wins.

Right now it’s just a picture and some text on the website, cleaning up things that aren’t being used, and then later on after the State of the Word, some things I need to have my host handle.

I’ll do some more complicated work tomorrow during the contributor day.

But, starting is much better than planning and not doing, so I’m taking the easy wins for now.

Wow. Basecamp’s gotten a metric ton of accessibility improvements.

Finally, reasonably accessible project management.

I have a lot of catching up to do to get in line with the way everyone else manages their projects, but I suspect my life’s about to get a lot easier.

Mmmm fewer spreadsheets and fewer hacky internal applications.

Disabled friends of abled people don’t let said abled people un-ironically use the phrase “differently abled”. If you’re using that phrase, the odds are high that you haven’t spent any time around disabled people, especially visibly disabled people. I’m bringing this up because I’m scrolling through Twitter and just ran across someone using “differently abled” as part of their foundation name, and I kind of want to hurl.
Very unpopular opinion:

Users treat their WordPress websites like red-headed step children because people who cobble together themes and plugins while calling themselves building custom websites do stupid, stupid things.

Just because you can do anything you want with WordPress doesn’t mean you should do whatever you want with WordPress, or any other tool for that matter.

Right now I am incredibly grateful and thankful for the extensive accessibility improvements to the WordPress widgets screen, because today I learned that there is at least one developer on this planet who actually worked to not support accessibility mode.

Is there a legitimate reason to do this other than pure unadulterated ableism? That’s not a rhetorical question.

If it weren’t for all the accessibility improvements to the main widgets screen, I would quite literally be prevented from completing this project.

So whoever did all this work, (and it was probably done in very large part by Andria Fercia), thank you so much, I owe you a ton right now. If it wasn’t all Andria, or if it was completely someone else, please get in touch so I can edit this post to ensure that you are publicly thanked by name or names.

I would be totally screwed right now if it weren’t for all your hard work.