From cd730698c8073ad126c05a189930264174db0bef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rohan Kumar Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2022 21:04:53 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] s/most/half/ --- content/posts/website-best-practices.gmi | 2 +- content/posts/website-best-practices.md | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/posts/website-best-practices.gmi b/content/posts/website-best-practices.gmi index 5c37cde..7dc1941 100644 --- a/content/posts/website-best-practices.gmi +++ b/content/posts/website-best-practices.gmi @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ My primary focus is inclusive design: => https://100daysofa11y.com/2019/12/03/accommodation-versus-inclusive-design/ Accomodation versus inclusive design. -Specifically, I focus on supporting *underrepresented ways to read a page*. Not all users load a page in a common web-browser and navigate effortlessly with their eyes and hands. Authors often neglect people who read through accessibility tools, tiny viewports, machine translators, "reading mode" implementations, the Tor network, printouts, hostile networks, and uncommon browsers. Compatibility with so many niches sounds far more daunting than it really is: if you only selectively override browser defaults and use semantic HTML, you've done most of the work already. +Specifically, I focus on supporting *underrepresented ways to read a page*. Not all users load a page in a common web-browser and navigate effortlessly with their eyes and hands. Authors often neglect people who read through accessibility tools, tiny viewports, machine translators, "reading mode" implementations, the Tor network, printouts, hostile networks, and uncommon browsers. Compatibility with so many niches sounds far more daunting than it really is: if you only selectively override browser defaults and use semantic HTML, you've done half of the work already. I'd like to re-iterate yet another time that this only applies to websites that primarily focus on text. If graphics, interactivity, etc. are an important part of your website, less of the article applies. My hope is for readers to consider *some* points I make on this page the next time they build a website, and be aware of the trade-offs they make when they deviate. I don't expect--or want--anybody to follow all of my advice, because doing so would make the Web quite a boring place! diff --git a/content/posts/website-best-practices.md b/content/posts/website-best-practices.md index 04068fd..0c3b7bf 100644 --- a/content/posts/website-best-practices.md +++ b/content/posts/website-best-practices.md @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ This is a "living document" that I add to as I receive feedback. See the [change I realize not everybody's going to ditch the Web and switch to Gemini or Gopher today (that'll take, like, a month at the longest). Until that happens, here's a non-exhaustive, highly-opinionated list of best practices for websites that focus primarily on text. I don't expect anybody to fully agree with the list; nonetheless, the article should have _some_ useful information for any web content author or front-end web developer. -My primary focus is [inclusive design](https://100daysofa11y.com/2019/12/03/accommodation-versus-inclusive-design/). Specifically, I focus on supporting _under­represented ways to read a page_. Not all users load a page in a common web-browser and navigate effortlessly with their eyes and hands. Authors often neglect people who read through accessibility tools, tiny viewports, machine translators, "reading mode" implemen­tations, the Tor network, printouts, hostile networks, and uncommon browsers. Compatibility with so many niches sounds far more daunting than it really is: if you only selectively override browser defaults and use semantic HTML, you've done most of the work already. +My primary focus is [inclusive design](https://100daysofa11y.com/2019/12/03/accommodation-versus-inclusive-design/). Specifically, I focus on supporting _under­represented ways to read a page_. Not all users load a page in a common web-browser and navigate effortlessly with their eyes and hands. Authors often neglect people who read through accessibility tools, tiny viewports, machine translators, "reading mode" implemen­tations, the Tor network, printouts, hostile networks, and uncommon browsers. Compatibility with so many niches sounds far more daunting than it really is: if you only selectively override browser defaults and use semantic HTML, you've done half of the work already. I'd like to re-iterate yet another time that this only applies to websites that primarily focus on text. If graphics, interactivity, etc. are an important part of your website, less of the article applies. My hope is for readers to consider _some_ points I make on this page the next time they build a website, and be aware of the trade-offs they make when they deviate. I don't expect--or want--anybody to follow all of my advice, because doing so would make the Web quite a boring place!