Thanks Andy.
Step One I took earlier this week. Expecting a response any minute now which I will share. I am very encouraged by what I hear and know we have a few really capable people who can identify the issues, work with others and come up with a sensible plan.
Jon
On 15 January 2014 12:39, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 15 January 2014 11:44, rexx rexx@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
I'm quite happy to continue giving advice on the issues covered at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility
and I'd like to see it adopted as default on the WMUK Wiki, but I
question
the value of volunteers re-inventing the wheel by chasing "gaps" that I'm not at all sure actually exist.
I echo Doug's comments, and have three points and a suggestion to add:
The first step should be to ask WMF what work is already in hand.
Accessibility professionals always recommend testing sites (or planned changes to them with a variety of real users, who have a range of disabilities, and who use a variety of assistive tools.
The biggest barrier in my experience is community resistance to accessibility improvements (witness the alt text issue referred to on the parallel discussion on the WMUK wiki, where alt text descriptions of images were deemed "too subjective" and "unverifiable").
I suggest we ask Bruce Lawson, accessibility and web standards advocate (disclosure; and a personal friend) with Opera (the browser vendor) to review Wikipedia and one to two sister sites, and give a talk at Wikimania (or, if he's not available, to recommend someone who can).
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org