![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
marjaerwinWeb pages are often inaccessible.
Browsers are usually built to display web pages as designed, so they enable inaccessibility instead of enabling users to safely browse.
Bug report systems such as bugzilla tend to downplay page-specific issues and refer users to projects like webcompat.
They also ask users to self-harm by testing the behavior without safety tools, in so called quote “safe” unquote mode, or with a so-called quote “clean” unquote profile.
Webcompat report systems are not accessible, and besides, they are intended to make sure all browsers display each web page just as sado-standard-istically as every other browser, so they don’t address accessibility.
They also ask users to self-harm by testing multiple browsers.
I am not a programmer. I don't know what the ideal infrastructure would look like. But it had better prioritize accessibility.
Browsers are usually built to display web pages as designed, so they enable inaccessibility instead of enabling users to safely browse.
Bug report systems such as bugzilla tend to downplay page-specific issues and refer users to projects like webcompat.
They also ask users to self-harm by testing the behavior without safety tools, in so called quote “safe” unquote mode, or with a so-called quote “clean” unquote profile.
Webcompat report systems are not accessible, and besides, they are intended to make sure all browsers display each web page just as sado-standard-istically as every other browser, so they don’t address accessibility.
They also ask users to self-harm by testing multiple browsers.
I am not a programmer. I don't know what the ideal infrastructure would look like. But it had better prioritize accessibility.
