I, as yet, have no opinion on whether a website 'overlay' is a god idea or not;
I've been away for a week or so and I've just read through this thread. I would
caution against reinventing the wheel, though - accessibility has been a known
issue on Wikipedia for many years, and some considerable effort has gone into
making things more accessible.
"Wikis aren't accessible" is one of those things people say, but nobody has yet
provided anything concrete to explain that position. I'm the first to admit
that the wiki format can't do everything, and that (contrary to the opinions of
some of the format's more passionate advocates) it has its drawbacks, but
nobody in his thread has explained what those drawbacks are in terms of
accessibility. I've been using wikis for years, so I readily admit that I can't
remember what it feels like for a first-time user. I'd really like to know if
this is just one of those things that people say (in which case we can try to
dispel an urban myth) or whether there is something about wikis tat makes them
inherently inaccessible for readers.
As an aside, the rationale of the proposed 'overlay' is being couched in terms
of accessibility, but the changes seem to be focused more on aesthetics, so I'm
curious what the problem is that this 'overlay' would solve, and how it would
solve it. I don't think it's a terrible idea by any stretch, but I'd like to
see some informed discussion about what we're trying to fix and the best way to
do that.
Thanks,
Harry Mitchell
http://enwp.org/User:HJ
Phone: 024 7698 0977
Skype: harry_j_mitchell
On Thursday, 12 June 2014, 11:17, Stevie Benton
<[email protected]> wrote:
Some examples were discussed on the Wikimedia UK wiki a while back here -
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Talk:Accessibility_of_the_Wikimedia_websites
One of our trustees, Carol Campbell, put together a really good paper on this,
including some advice from the RNIB which we were given permission to use. I
seem to remember that rather than focusing on the issue of accessibility, there
was more discussion about whether we could use those elements of Carol's paper.
It wasn't very productive, to say the least.
On 11 June 2014 21:08, Andy Mabbett <[email protected]> wrote:
On 10 June 2014 18:28, Stevie Benton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Our wiki, like pretty much any Media Wiki installation I can think of, is
>> not very accessible
>
>How so?
>
>--
>Andy Mabbett
>@pigsonthewing
>http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikimedia UK mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
--
Stevie Benton
Head of External Relations
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173
@StevieBenton
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales,
Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th
Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United
Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The
Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia,
amongst other projects).
Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over
Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
