The web is fucked and there’s nothing we can do about it. Kev Quirk looks back fondly at Web 1.0.

  • I don’t think accessibility is meant in term of disabled people.

    I understood it as accessible in terms of technical knowledge. Anyone can whip out their phone and access the internet… or at least use an app which needs internet.

    Eternal September is another term for it.

    • 0x1C3B00DA@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Accessibility almost always refers to disabled people, especially in web development. I’ve never heard anyone in the industry refer to accessibility in any other way, without explicitly making that clear.

      If they meant the reading you took from it, that’s even worse and my point is even more pertinent.

      • If they meant the reading you took from it, that’s even worse and my point is even more pertinent.

        Why? The internet is a powerful tool and there are plenty of morons using it without knowing anything about it.

        • 0x1C3B00DA@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          my original point was that the main idea of the article down plays the accessibility gains of the modern web. Your reading was that the author meant a different definition of accessibility and not A11y, which would mean the author didn’t just down play it, they completely ignored it. The author is complaining that the modern web is awful, while ignoring the huge gains for people who need these accessibility features and how awful web 1.0 was for them

          • I think the author used both meanings at different times.

            First time they mention interesting website designs at the cost of accessibility.

            But the second time they mean how low the technical barrier is to access the modern (and bland) web and how it tries to caters to lowest common denominator.