{"p":"","h":{"iv":"ROXSYW+cfvEbFHu5","at":"ocxplSQjdRC3tXEtB/9/wg=="}}

@darius "Competing Access Needs" is the phrasing I've most commonly heard.

But in this case, in software/web design, they're not in competition -- they are both handled by design that allows the user to pick their own font size, for as wide a range of font sizes as possible, without breaking or without causing fundamental shifts in how interacting with the content can work.

Because the user's own set-up and own environment is part of the render loop, we don't need to try making "The One Accessible Version For All Disabled People" -- instead, we integrate into the settings provided to us and design in functional knobs and control points for customization to be fit into that environment.

1
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin
Gadfly (-booq-)

@darius I suppose in this case it's "user experience customizability, including for accessibility" and "developer time and task-complexity, especially for the task of ensuring security" that are the competing access needs.

(And like many Competing Access Needs situations, some people have both needs! There are undoubtedly disabled dissidents with various disabilities who both need to be able to use tools, but also need those whatever tools they use to be rock-solid securitywise. And that's even leaving aside the "developers are people too with a finite amount of effort they can safely and confidently put in".)

1
2y
Replies