| ▲ | johnh-hn 2 days ago |
| Not mine. I loathe Electron like many people. But, as someone who is legally blind and has very limited vision, being able to have custom UI zoom levels, per application, has made my life much easier. For a long time, and mostly out of frustration, I wanted to build my own stack of software around my vision. But the mammoth amount of effort it would require meant I never went through with it. |
|
| ▲ | freecodeio 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| nice point, people like to shit on the web but it has one of the biggest accessibility features that most of the gui frameworks would just leave them as feature suggestions for years |
| |
| ▲ | hajile 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I'd note that as stuff like A11y gets added into something like Discord, we'll see the app slowly bloat up to compensate. Google Chrome generally used around 25mb per tab in 2010. Today, that number is often 500mb or even 1gb. | | |
| ▲ | masfuerte 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | And Windows apps had accessibility before computers had 25MB RAM in total. Accessibility is not the cause of bloat. | | |
| ▲ | freecodeio 2 days ago | parent [-] | | do any of these native GUI libraries provide just as rich accessibility experiences to disabled people? | | |
| ▲ | TJSomething 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | If we mean native as in OS-specific GUI APIs built-in to the operating system, then yes. All of the browsers are abstractions on top of that. If we mean cross-platform GUI libraries for Rust I think your choices are like Dioxus (a webview), Tauri (also a webview), Slint (draws its own widgets), and maybe Fltk (draws its own widgets) with extensions? | |
| ▲ | ethin 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, yes they do. WXDragon for Rust, for example, provides quite good accessibility. And maybe accessibility would be better for frameworks like QT or DearImGUI if (1) people didn't act like the web was some paragon of accessibility (hint: it really, really isn't, not when websites misuse web APIs -- which happens quite frequently) and (2) UI framework developers didn't just make a UI framework that looked sexy but left accessibility on the floor. What's oddly being ignored in this entire thread (so far, as of the time of writing) is that back in 2017-2018 Discord was an Electron app and was completely inaccessible. The web did not magically bring accessibility to the table -- we disabled people had to go yell at Discord to fix their shit, and even then it took them like 2-3 years, and even now Discord has some very very weird accessibility issues that will randomly crop up here and there. |
|
| |
| ▲ | afdbcreid 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The article implies that a11y will exist on launch and maybe already is. And it doesn't require that huge amount of RAM, no. What requires the Chrome RAM is running JavaScript and do it fast, and a lot of extremely complicated features, most of which a single app will never use. | |
| ▲ | saagarjha 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is mostly because websites have gotten heavier and we want them to run faster. | |
| ▲ | hobo123 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | How much of that is due to chrome, and how much is because say Jira and YouTube are incredibly bloated? | |
| ▲ | Ygg2 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Would you really need 500mb for accessibility? Can't text to speech be outsourced to the OS or companion app? |
| |
| ▲ | pjmlp 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | All the native APIs across major platforms have accessibility features, how do you think browsers implement theirs? |
|
|
| ▲ | sitzkrieg 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| i switched a cross platform application TO web stack for this reason. accessibility and screen reader usability is incredibly important and massively overlooked in many domains |
|
| ▲ | GoblinSlayer a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Already done. Windows scales dialog resources according to font size, gtk has text only scaling. |
| |
| ▲ | johnh-hn a day ago | parent [-] | | The Windows settings scale resources for the OS, not per application. The more applications you use, the worse these settings become. If I'm unable to use an application's own features to modify the size of something in its UI, I have to fall back to the Windows settings. That leads to the following: 1. Use the make everything bigger/font size settings to change the size of what I currently can't see 2. Restart 3. Open every application I need, and go through every major feature in each of them to determine if I can still see things comfortably, while making sure no elements have exploded in size as this also leads to usability problems 4. If not, go to 1 I have to do this every time I install a new application, or one of them updates and changes their UI or decides to opt into the Windows accessibility settings. The latter one happened a few years ago with Firefox, and cost me a day to sort. Invariably, it leads me to compromising on what I can and can't see. | | |
|
