Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:

I met a blind programmer at a conference back in the 80's, and had a long talk 
with her and how she did it. I was amazed. Ever since, I've wanted to ensure 
products I've worked on were accessible to the blind.

It's one thing to follow guidelines, it's another to have someone who relies on 
a screenreader actually try it out. If anyone here uses a screenreader, or
knows 
someone who does, please give dlang.org a try and let us know about how we can 
improve their experience with it.

Bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:

On Sunday, 23 September 2018 at 22:07:36 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
 I met a blind programmer at a conference back in the 80's, and 
 had a long talk with her and how she did it. I was amazed. Ever 
 since, I've wanted to ensure products I've worked on were 
 accessible to the blind.

 It's one thing to follow guidelines, it's another to have 
 someone who relies on a screenreader actually try it out. If 
 anyone here uses a screenreader, or knows someone who does, 
 please give dlang.org a try and let us know about how we can 
 improve their experience with it.

By the top of my head I can already say there are some things 
that don't follow accessibility standards like the use of b tags 
on the front page, they should be replaced by strong tags 
instead. Probably a few more cases too, just a real quick check.

Vladimir Panteleev <thecybershadow.lists gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
 like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be 
 replaced by strong tags

The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not content. 
Their use is correct.

Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
 like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be 
 replaced by strong tags

 The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not 
 content. Their use is correct.

HTML tags are usually fine. JS can cause problems. Some older 
posts (in order of appearance):

https://forum.dlang.org/post/avyxxydzbghsjmsucark forum.dlang.org
https://forum.dlang.org/post/arkvmtfljjtjpfrccqbu forum.dlang.org
https://forum.dlang.org/post/wcnwyqugkcqkkyeghccb forum.dlang.org

But I think browsers / screen reading software have improved a 
lot in this regard. I dunno how react (native) and the like are 
handled though.

aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 15:19:01 UTC, Chris wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir 
 Panteleev wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
 like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be 
 replaced by strong tags

 The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not 
 content. Their use is correct.

 HTML tags are usually fine. JS can cause problems. Some older 
 posts (in order of appearance):

 https://forum.dlang.org/post/avyxxydzbghsjmsucark forum.dlang.org
 https://forum.dlang.org/post/arkvmtfljjtjpfrccqbu forum.dlang.org
 https://forum.dlang.org/post/wcnwyqugkcqkkyeghccb forum.dlang.org

 But I think browsers / screen reading software have improved a 
 lot in this regard. I dunno how react (native) and the like are 
 handled though.

Aside using semantic HTML elements like strong, em,... the 
WAI-ARIA standard follows. Also the use of title, alt and 
tab-index is also encouraged in forms (where necessary).

This article highlights some of the most important things to 
consider.
https://www.sitepoint.com/real-world-accessibility-html5-aria-and-the-modern-web/

Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:

On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 15:10:53 UTC, aberba wrote:

 Aside using semantic HTML elements like strong, em,... the 
 WAI-ARIA standard follows. Also the use of title, alt and 
 tab-index is also encouraged in forms (where necessary).

 This article highlights some of the most important things to 
 consider.
 https://www.sitepoint.com/real-world-accessibility-html5-aria-and-the-modern-web/

Careful with the ARIA stuff. It is useful but not always 
necessary. Screen reading software is aware of sliders etc. and 
may already pass on the relevant information to the user. The 
only way to go about it is to have things tested by real users of 
_various_ screen readers (Dolphin, NVDA, VoiceOver etc.) You 
don't wanna waste time making a website accessible only to find 
out that the screen reader already understood it without your 
help.

bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
 like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be 
 replaced by strong tags

 The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not 
 content. Their use is correct.

I disagree:

https://achecker.ca/checker/index.php

See:

"1.4 Distinguishable: Make it easier for users to see and hear 
content including separating foreground from background.

Success Criteria 1.4.4 Resize text (AA)

Check 116: b (bold) element used.
Repair: Replace your b (bold) elements with em or strong.
Error Line 430, Column 67:
<b>D</b>
Error Line 432, Column 18:
<b>D Programming Language</b>"

Vladimir Panteleev <thecybershadow.lists gmail.com> writes:

On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 05:57:06 UTC, bauss wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir 
 Panteleev wrote:
 The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not 
 content. Their use is correct.

 I disagree:

That doesn't address the argument. A program can't know whether a 
<b> tag is part of the presentation or content. The argument 
stands.

bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
 like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be 
 replaced by strong tags

 The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not 
 content. Their use is correct.

And also representation should generally be done with <span>

Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:

On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 06:01:58 UTC, bauss wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir 
 Panteleev wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
 like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be 
 replaced by strong tags

 The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not 
 content. Their use is correct.

 And also representation should generally be done with <span>

It's more important how the screen reading software parses and 
represents it to the user. Screen readers build their own DOM in 
the background. So don't get lost in semantic details that may 
have no bearing whatsoever on accessibility. I remember that a 
while ago "<em>" was not supported by all browsers, that's why 
devs opted for "<b>" or "<span style='font-weight: bold;'>" 
(which is the one I prefer).

Usually, if a homepage is marked up normally in bog standard 
HTML, then users of screen readers have no problems reading the 
content. Problems may arise when it comes to things like code 
examples that are somehow handled by JS or the like.

I'd say you start testing the general examples, the language 
specs and the library documentation. If they're not accessible, 
then a visually impaired user cannot use D.

This said, I was working with a blind person a couple of years 
ago (I think it was 3 years ago) and he used D for one of his 
assignments, he never had a problem with the documentation.

bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:

On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 08:49:13 UTC, Chris wrote:
 On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 06:01:58 UTC, bauss wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir 
 Panteleev wrote:
 On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
 like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be 
 replaced by strong tags

 The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not 
 content. Their use is correct.

 And also representation should generally be done with <span>

 It's more important how the screen reading software parses and 
 represents it to the user. Screen readers build their own DOM 
 in the background. So don't get lost in semantic details that 
 may have no bearing whatsoever on accessibility. I remember 
 that a while ago "<em>" was not supported by all browsers, 
 that's why devs opted for "<b>" or "<span style='font-weight: 
 bold;'>" (which is the one I prefer).

 Usually, if a homepage is marked up normally in bog standard 
 HTML, then users of screen readers have no problems reading the 
 content. Problems may arise when it comes to things like code 
 examples that are somehow handled by JS or the like.

 I'd say you start testing the general examples, the language 
 specs and the library documentation. If they're not accessible, 
 then a visually impaired user cannot use D.

 This said, I was working with a blind person a couple of years 
 ago (I think it was 3 years ago) and he used D for one of his 
 assignments, he never had a problem with the documentation.

Yes I agree to an extend, but if a browser doesn't support <em> 
(All does by now though.) then you could still support it 
technically with css.

The "not supporting" is really just the browser not having 
default styling for it which you can do with css, that's why 
things like angular material etc. have their own tags that aren't 
standard tags, but are still represented with styles that 
resemble what the tag is. Of course there are exceptions like 
<md-button> will become <button> etc.

I'm probably just nitpicking though, but if you care about 
accessibility then you should follow all standards, no exceptions 
or at least try to.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn/Accessibility/HTML

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn/Accessibility/CSS_and_JavaScript

It might not be a bottleneck in this case and probably won't make 
much of a difference, but yah. Some screenreaders might actually 
interpret <b> as <strong> etc. which will also make it a 
misrepresentation in this case, because it's supposed to just be 
a presentation and not emphasised text.

So in my opinion either it should be emphasised the correct way 
using <strong> or <em>, or it should be <span> tags with styling, 
just like you showed with font-weight.

Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:

On 9/25/2018 1:49 AM, Chris wrote:
 This said, I was working with a blind person a couple of years ago (I think it 
 was 3 years ago) and he used D for one of his assignments, he never had a 
 problem with the documentation.

That's good to hear.

0xEAB <desisma heidel.beer> writes:

On Sunday, 23 September 2018 at 22:07:36 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
 It's one thing to follow guidelines, it's another to have 
 someone who relies on a screenreader actually try it out. If 
 anyone here uses a screenreader, or knows someone who does, 
 please give dlang.org a try and let us know about how we can 
 improve their experience with it.

Well, one can use some text-based browser and check out how it 
looks there, `lynx` for example. Of course this cannot replace a 
real screenreader but it gives some suggestion how a page with no 
styles looks like.

So, how does it look like?
- nav + search and the intro are fine. Then some mixture of text 
and code examples follows
- news, learn, docs, ... sections are fine
- "Fast code, fast." is again a wild mixture of text and code 
examples (there's no hide/show, everything is collapsed)

0xEAB <desisma heidel.beer> writes:

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 16:02:51 UTC, 0xEAB wrote:
 everything is collapsed)

should mean "everything is expanded", of course