Comment on The sheer amount of websites that are completely unusable without JavaScript

• neclimdul@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Also the EU and technically a lot of US sites that provide services to or for the government have similar requirements. The latter is largely unenforced though unless you’re interacting with states that also have accessibility laws.

  And honestly a ton of sites that should be covered by these requirements just don’t care or get rubber stamped as compliant. Because unless someone actually complains they don’t have a reason to care.

  I kind of thought the EU requirements that have some actual penalties would change this indifference but other than some busy accessibility groups helping people that already care, I haven’t heard a lot about enforcement that would suggest it’s actually changed.

  source
• victorz@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  That’s excellent.

  And what do you make that doesn’t include JavaScript? Like what kind of software/website/content? If you don’t mind sharing, of course.

  source

  • neclimdul@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    It doesn’t have to not include JavaScript, that would be quite difficult and unreasonable. Accessible sites are not about limiting functionality but providing the same functionality.

    I haven’t gone fully down the rabbit hole on this but my understanding is even something like Nuxt if you follow best practices will deliver HTML that can be interacted with and serve individual pages.

    That said, screen readers and other support shouldn’t require running without any JavaScript. Having used them to test sites that might be the smart approach but they actually have a lot of tools for announcing dynamic website changes that are built into ARIA properties at the HTML level so very flexible. There are of course also JavaScript APIs for announcing changes.

    They just require additional effort and forethought to implement and can be buggy if you do really weird things.

    source