Post by @lmmarsano@fedinsfw.app

2026-11-02 23:51 UTC

Because that’s not a solution: the post remains inaccessible. Unless you edit the post, demanding they fix it is the only solution. I see stating the obvious struck a nerve for the downvoters, so let me dumb it down for the unfortunate ilk unable to grasp the obvious: y’all full of shit. You think someone scrolling through posts the same as you is going to notice a text alternative hidden away in some comment on some other page? You expect them to open every post unlike you for something that likely won’t even be there? That’s not equivalent in the slightest. Shit’s daft as fuck: keep dreaming. Now examine critically the substance of the other commenter’s actions. While the comment is effective at drawing upvotes, is it actually effective at the main outcome of doing anything meaningful for accessibility as they purport? No, the comment doesn’t appear to anyone scrolling through posts. Tellingly, the community is simply rewarding self-indulgent ploys to gain upvotes that do nothing for accessibility while condemning meaningful answers to actually solve it. That’s quite damning. It indicates a toxic community that cares more about indulging community narcissism than acting on their purpose directly within their capacity right here to address an issue in their control. A real progressive would care enough about equal access to look up & determine the truth on the matter, so they can pursue and promote real answers instead of empty gestures that don’t meaningfully address inaccessible content. The placebo they pretend works stops them from developing real cures. In sum, some lemmy communities in particular are toxic & hostile to web accessibility in ways we don’t find in bluesky and other parts of the fediverse such as mastodon where web accessibility is common practice. Back to the point, here’s an introduction to web accessibility that you seem to sorely need. You can also read the technical guideline while you’re at it. However, your nonsolution is an unhelpful illusion that diverts people from pursuing credible solutions.

Replies (1)

@Rentlar@lemmy.ca 2026-11-03 02:23

Long Reply www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/general/G92 This is among one of many techniques presented at the WCAG site you linked. You putting text in a top level comment would seem to me to satisfy this, at least in intent. If the image was removed, then a long description present on the page, even in a top level comment, would appropriately describe what was there. It also alleviates the searchability issue you highlighted. It also doesn’t meet qualify under any failure criteria. Might be still only partially WCAG compliant but it would make it more accessible for users who need it. You’re right, I’m not an accessibility expert, only taken basic AODA training in Ontario. Even then, the training said to offer and make accomodations to the best extent possible. I do put transcripts on my text heavy image posts because the version of my Lemmy app I used at the time hadn’t let me put alt text. Most of my inline images within the last year have the alt property filled. (example) > Unless you edit the post, demanding they fix it is the only solution. Why is that the only solution to be more inclusive? That’s not helping anyone. WCAG specifically advises against requiring it to be done using their specifically defined techniques only, just that the outcome is an appropriately accessible piece for people who need it. Try this if you want to implore to edit it or do it in the future: > To help with WCAG accessibility, OP please put a transcript on this image! I’ve made one for you… [Transcript]. It took me less than two minutes to put up the transcript in my previous reply. addendum: It does mention to be a programmatically determinable non-text alternative, it must be from author-supplied data that links to it, to specifically be conformant to this standard. You can still put in the minimal effort to take the author’s data and link it for the people who can’t so that users with assisstive technologies can easily find it on the same page when they go looking. Like I said, complain and be part of the solution to make things more accessible for people who need it. I hadn’t claimed that adding one would magically make it fully WCAG 2.2 complaint, only in that direction.

Open ##5514432