Copyedit of 2020 Accessibility chapter and addition of more figures

[tunetheweb]

Progress on #1432

You can view this version on this test site so you can compare to the current production version.

Made the following changes:

• Added a lot of figures as felt the chapter was light on them, presumably due to rush at the end. Took a lot of liberties here so let me know if you want to remove any.
• Removed unused graphics
• Merged two different "Zoom" sections.
• Moved all the ARIA sections headings up one level as only one heading under "Assistive technologies on the Web" heading.
• Usual edits (remove start quotes, add code styling, sentence case headings...etc.).
• Removed the "unedited" label
• Shorted the featured quotes as looked a bit unbalanced compared to short quote. Now looks like this on the home page:

Few questions for the authors that I'll flag.

Very enjoyable read btw!

[alextait1]

These changes are fine by me. Made little commits addressing your TODOS as well

One thought for the core team, maybe for next year: would be neat if instead of verbose text alternatives for bar charts if there were tables for AT users to understand the information.

[rviscomi]

One thought for the core team, maybe for next year: would be neat if instead of verbose text alternatives for bar charts if there were tables for AT users to understand the information.

Oh interesting idea, I had thought that plain text descriptions were a good "lowest common denominator" for most people to be able to read and grok the results. I'd be interested to explore having tabular alternatives to graphical figures if that's more helpful.

[alextait1]

One thought for the core team, maybe for next year: would be neat if instead of verbose text alternatives for bar charts if there were tables for AT users to understand the information.

Oh interesting idea, I had thought that plain text descriptions were a good "lowest common denominator" for most people to be able to read and grok the results. I'd be interested to explore having tabular alternatives to graphical figures if that's more helpful.

Yeah I think whenever theres information with relationships on two axes, tables are a great choice. Since they've been around since the dawn of time lol, I think it's fair to say AT users in general are pretty comfortable with navigating them and there's just very clear relationships between the information if they are properly structured. Having the description is certainly better than nothing and helpful, this could be an augmentation.

[tunetheweb]

Some of the chapters last year (CDN) did include both figures and tables. Personally I find it a bit repetitive - I prefer to link to the source of the data rather than explicitly inline the table.

Additional, while that may work for these tables in this chapter, for some other chapters (e.g. the Performance chapter) the figures are made up of hundreds of data points so not something best presented in a table in the chapter.

Which also brings about other, non-Google Sheets figures (e.g. other images, videos... etc). Having an additional description on top of the caption/alt text, allows these to be described in more detail.

Saying all that, we’ve struggled to find the best ways of making our figures accessible to all (and not just those with AT). While I think we’ve landed on a good position, I’d definitely appreciate more input into the best way to do this!

[alextait1]

Some of the chapters last year (CDN) did include both figures and tables. Personally I find it a bit repetitive - I prefer to link to the source of the data rather than explicitly inline the table.

Additional, while that may work for these tables in this chapter, for some other chapters (e.g. the Performance chapter) the figures are made up of hundreds of data points so not something best presented in a table in the chapter.

Which also brings about other, non-Google Sheets figures (e.g. other images, videos... etc). Having an additional description on top of the caption/alt text, allows these to be described in more detail.

Saying all that, we’ve struggled to find the best ways of making our figures accessible to all (and not just those with AT). While I think we’ve landed on a good position, I’d definitely appreciate more input into the best way to do this!

I think all of the graphs in this chapter would be good candidates for tabular equivalents and probably the same is true for most instances throughout the almanac. Just something to consider, very much an opinion and I would 100% recommend usability testing with disabled folks. I'm sure some folks even in our networks would be willing to supply feedback if it were tweeted or something sometime.

Would be interested to know what @ericwbailey @aardrian and @oluoluoxenfree think about this sometime too :)

[tunetheweb]

I've pulled the figures discussion into it's own issue in #1769

Let's bring this issue back to the copy edit and changes in this chapter so we fix a few things and remove that unedited label!
@alextait1 I presume you're happy to approve since you've reviewed this?
@oluoluoxenfree did you get a chance to review?
Anyone else with any comments on this PR?

[alextait1]

I've pulled the figures discussion into it's own issue in #1769

Let's bring this issue back to the copy edit and changes in this chapter so we fix a few things and remove that unedited label!
@alextait1 I presume you're happy to approve since you've reviewed this?
@oluoluoxenfree did you get a chance to review?
Anyone else with any comments on this PR?

Yep LGTM

[tunetheweb]

I’m going to go ahead and merge this. Feel free to open a new pull request for any further changes.

Thanks again to you all for your hard work on this chapter!