davatron5000 / a11y-nutrition-cards Goto Github PK

My guess is there is a whole host of instructions missing from this README.md to actually get this to work. None of the commands listed worked. Probably because I don't have the tooling needed.

I looked up the bundle command. Not sure what that goes with. Tried looking on npm, and found npm-bundle. That didn't work.

Jekyll, was mentioned. I looked that up, and it looks like a Ruby something-or-other. So, I installed Ruby. Then, I installed Jekyll. After installing, I tried the bundle commands again. Now I get the following errors:

Could not locate Gemfile
Could not locate Gemfile or .bundle/ directory

I'm assuming I'm closer to getting this to work, but am still missing something.

Recommendations:

• Fix the README.md include all the missing tooling installations required
• Or, remove all the tooling cruft, and just use basic HTML/JS to make this project more accessible.

Could we use JSON for the components instead of a table in markdown?

Some feedback from Twitter:

I really love this idea, but I think there’s an elephant in the room: the Authoring Practices can be very theoretical, in user testing I saw people not get the keyboard strokes they (eg tabs) require and struggle to interact with the content. User testing still matters a lot

Currently a11y Nutrition Cards doesn't offer any code solutions so there's not much we can do at this point, but it makes sense to vet the expectations we're listing out (largely borrowed from the ARIA Practices site).

Based on a quick surf of the ARIA Practices repo issues, it does seem to heavily review patterns. But maybe that's naïve to assume.

I have some friends and corporations (Microsoft Accessibility Teams, Texas School for the Blind, a11yproject, network of a11y professionals, etc) that I can reach out to on:

1. The condition of the ARIA Practices examples
2. Initial impressions of what might need to be updated or clarified in a site like this.

My general feeling is that this is an immense amount of effort for user research and testing (or even coordination if we were to distribute this effort). I'm not opposed to it, just cognizant of that fact. I'm also not sure we'd be able to out-research or out-expertise the team of accessibility professionals on the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative.

I'm a fan of user testing assumptions, just don't want to re-invent the wheel and re-hash already hashed out arguments over screenreader verbosity and nuance.

Thanks for opening it up.

Adding sub heading to the different components instead of small

<small>Labelling Expectations</small> use <h3>Labelling Expectations</h3>

Per twitter request:

do you think it would be possible to find a cruelty free image for your a11y page? I am really into accessibility and want to learn more but I can't look at the poor pig marked for murder... it's not very inclusive.

The pig is an "understand the parts" metaphor. I tried different animals, computer parts, etc. but the pig seemed the simplest way to construct the metaphor. I understand the animal rights point of view (vegetarian for 11yrs), happy to switch if there's a viable alternative but not sure at the moment what fits the bill.

Open to suggestions.