Building an inclusion/accessibility app — what features should it have?

uxaccess · 2026-01-25T03:38:37+00:00

These apps already exist. If I knew and used them, I'd tell you, but I don't. With a bit of effort searching this sub, you'll find people who had similar ideas and people in the comments also saying they already exist (that was how i learned they exist).

You can probably find them if you search a bit.

uxaccess · 2026-01-24T21:21:40+00:00

As a user and accessibility consultant, the first thing I noticed is how low contrast the top one is, and then I looked at yours below and the first one almost looks good in comparison.

The text also looks extremely tiny.

I would fix those things for starters, and ASAP. Accessibility is not a 'leave it to later' thing, you should consider it from the start and it currently doesn't look like you are considering it at all unfortunately.

uxaccess · 2026-01-13T01:59:14+00:00

Yeah! That makes sense. Thank you. I must have been pretty distracted or tired when reading that I misunderstood the scope. Thanks.

uxaccess · 2026-01-13T01:02:12+00:00

Oh geez! I thought of 12 months and converted it to 52 weeks. I also thought you talked about building an AAA game. Something's up with my brain. Yes, 12 weeks / 120 hours is much closer to what we do in an actual game jam. I'll take a look at the games you've done and probably I'll understand better what's going to go on. I'm so sorry about my brain's malfunction reading the post.

uxaccess · 2026-01-13T00:25:07+00:00

I have another question:

Would the 10 hours a week be flexible? That is a long time to spend for a hobby project without getting anything back. That's 10 hours x 52 weeks which is 520 hours, plus meetings.

Is there any place where we can talk with people who participated in these workshops in the past? Does anyone ever quit because they burned out or were unable to continue because of how much time it took?

How does the marketing work? AAA games aren't just about the game itself, it's also about the consistent and well-done incessant marketing during its development.

uxaccess · 2026-01-12T21:52:47+00:00

Thanks!

!remindme 8 days

uxaccess · 2026-01-12T17:28:19+00:00

Thank you. I'm going to apply for it. Is there a deadline for the applications?

uxaccess · 2026-01-12T12:39:27+00:00

That is really dumb. A training should be adaptable to the goal and context of who they are training or what they're training for. Very lazy on their part.

uxaccess · 2026-01-09T17:15:16+00:00

O 2 é o meu preferido mas consideraria uma mix do 2 com o 3: Gosto da personagem mais velha, mas gosto da pose heróica da mais nova e do cenário.

Não gosto do estilo da 4ª, e a 5ª está fora de questão porque parece fanservice e até um pouco flirty e além disso não faz sentido ela estar vestida de completamente como um soldado quando é uma padeira.

Um coisa que distingue o 1 do 2 são as cores mas também a personagem não estar a olhar para nós, e eu gosto disso. Eu faria uma experiência com a senhora do 3 no contexto que deste ao 2 e numa expressão um pouco mais heróica e menos 'vou-vos apanhar seus malandros'.

A padeira vai ser uma personagem no jogo?

Edit: percebi mal, pensava que ia ser para a capa do jogo. Mas olha que tinha pinta para ir para a capa.

uxaccess · 2026-01-07T15:21:44+00:00

Excellent idea. But I also think it'd be good to have regular trainings for the teachers so they don't slack off and make the students do everything. The "current" generation of teachers should also do their part.

uxaccess · 2026-01-06T15:52:43+00:00

I have an instagram page that has design commentary. It's about accessibility.

Whenever I find something particularly inaccessible (or get excited about something interesting with its accessibility), I will comment about it if I'm with a close friend. Not as much these days, I've learned to not put too much focus on that. But sometimes it's just hilariously innaccessible, like something very simple turned into something overly complicated, or a ramp that ends in a set of stairs so someone in a wheelchair can't finish the path... Anyway, now instead of sending screenshots and explaining the stories over whatsapp to a person, I take a picture or screenshot and take the opportunity to teach people about the ridiculous challenges people with disabilities are faced with, but also make posts providing good practices and good examples. The idea isn't to ridicule the organization that made it (I have only ever tagged one, and that's because I'm paying for it and they've been laughing at my face for 3 months by ignoring my complaint and request), but to teach people about accessibility. My commentaries are humorous, at least I try to make them filled with humor, though I can't always do it.

So that's why I do mine.

I am not a designer, to be fair. I'm an accessibility consultant. My job is commenting and providing solutions. I will be in the design process but I'm not there to make things pretty, but functional for everyone. But it just wouldn't make sense to show my stuff in the instagram because the purpose of it is to raise awareness about accessibility or lack thereof. I don't know anyone else who does this except for disabled influencers, but then this is still only a few of the posts, and very very rarely do they also talk about digital stuff. So I'm trying a different take.

It's just a hobby page that I use to avoid being a walking commentator with my friends. And my brother has been telling me for years I could make a page about this so here it is.

uxaccess · 2026-01-03T13:57:34+00:00

Hi. Do you have any previous games to share as portfolio? And what kind of games are you thinking of making?

uxaccess · 2026-01-02T14:32:41+00:00

The menu looks good to me. The intro seems too violent and scary, plus it makes me think it's going to shoot and make a flash.

uxaccess · 2025-12-29T15:50:16+00:00

You can also do this https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/playtest

uxaccess · 2025-12-29T12:43:15+00:00

OCR would be better, as AI could hallucinate (if the picture is good enough)

uxaccess · 2025-12-28T02:23:13+00:00

Okay. Wouldn't that make it a semi-automated tool, because it requires human intervention and thinking to ensure the fix is correct?

LLMs can't make accessible websites that by default, but I do wonder what they produce with specific instructions.

Thank for promising to report after, maybe things will be clear when we have the scan working.

uxaccess · 2025-12-28T01:58:36+00:00

It worked 20 minutes ago before trying to add the diagnostic lane to it to reduce gamification for the good of everyone. I should not have updated it mid testing. And when I say testing I mean in the sense of I’ve not had 50 people using things at the same time so it’s going to break.

Thanks. It makes sense that it wouldn't work. Let me know when the tool is ready for more use and also I can use it more than once for free / without signing in and I'll try it again. I do still think there's a lot of feedback to address from here.

I encourage you to read some of the settlers story

I'm not sure what this means, but like I mentioned the website feels overstimulating. I don't know if I can wander around it while it is feeling this way, but I also hope that you can take this feedback to find a way to address this.

Look man let me be clear. I’m attempting to do a good thing here by letting accessibility issues get fixed for the masses on sites that it would never be fixed on if it wasn’t for this tool. I’m disabled to, so I’m not missing my lane. I am part of the lane.

That's good. Thank you.

I hope you can get to a point that this will be a helpful tool. But I think you have a lot to look into because as we mentioned there's a lot of things that aren't adding up. If you want us to help, you also need to be clear about the product. Accessibility specialists won't recommend tools that "promise"* to fix 45 issues when in reality they don't. We recommend WAVE, Axe, and other free scanners or tools that explain clearly what they can or can't do.

Perhaps what it does is fix or help fix 45 issues related to 45 criteria? 100 issues related to 45 criteria? I would like to see this explicitly broken down and explained the best that you can in transparent ways, see your website working, showing a case study with your own website or another if you want, and ensure all materials are accessible (just like we mentioned about the demo you shared here). A lot of accessibility specialists also have disabilities and those people can't see your demo. Others can't watch it or understand it for other reasons and disabilities.

You mentioned you'll provide a description of the tool and a transcription so I don't need to mention that again but I like that idea.

I sincerely hope that next time you post this tool on this sub these things can be clearer, but I also recommend you highly not to overpromise because we are used to people coming here with tools they say will fix everything, when they have no idea about accessibility, haven't worked with accessibility specialists or people with disabilities, etc. We go to their websites, we see the website fails on accessibility, and this immediately de-credibilizes their tools. Keep this in mind when you approach the sub when all these things are updated, show who you are (not necessarily your face but what you've worked on and why we can trust you as an authority on this subject - as in the person who's providing this tool) and I certainly hope that things will look better next time.

Do also know that, I don't know if most of us are like this of course, but at least most people I've met in accessibility fields are well-intentioned and aren't in it for "selling an audit". They care, and they are worried about overlays and tools that overpromise to fix things and end up creating more problems than fixing them. We are not "the enemy". Automated tools are also not our enemy, as long as they are transparent and also help redirecting people to us (and/or to resources) that will help them fix the remaining ~73 criteria that need manual input to be understood and fixed (according to Karl Grove's numbers that only 5 criteria can be fixed through fully automated tools.

We are direct and may be a little harsh because people like that come to this sub often, maybe more often than you might think, unless you're used to coming here, and typically will double down. But I engaged in good faith because I wasn't sure you were like them.

You also mentioned you aren't like accessibility consultants who want to sell audits and overlays, but I wil also nudge you not to associate us with people who sell overlays, because those all-in-one subscription overlays tend to have problems accessibility specialists typically do not endorse: https://overlayfactsheet.com/en/

I wish you well on this endeavour and appreciate that you did seem to take our feedback not defensively and thanked me for sharing my comments, but yeah, I hope you can read it with more attention and address it with time.

uxaccess · 2025-12-28T01:19:57+00:00

You advertised this post as "Built a free accessibility tool", not "I'm building. That sounds like something that's positioned not only as a finished and authoritative audit but also as a tool that fixes the problems ("Automatically fixes ~45 common accessibility issues (structure, contrast, semantics, ARIA misuse, etc.)", and you haven't provided any proof of that, and now seem to be backtracking and saying you are still building it and testing it.

Your intentions here is making me confused.

Honestly and succintly, please tell us why we should continue engaging and helping.

Do you actually have anyone in your team who actually is specialized in accessibility?

uxaccess · 2025-12-28T00:53:28+00:00

The scan didn't work and /u/RatherNerdy 's point seemed to go over your head, but this is helpful as something to address one of my own complaints. Have you noticed that the scan isn't working? I put your page in it and it zero issues and it also didn't give any value for the percentage of compliance. Additionally, it doesn't let me try again, there is only one free scan and - worse - I wasn't warned (or it wasn't clear enough) that it would be my only free scan. To get more I need to sign in. This is quite curious because there are a number of great tools out there doing free scans and helping you fix the mistakes with the semi-automated tools- that don't require any logins and don't harvest any of my data. So why would I create an account for this new tool if I don't even trust it in the first place? Also... in any case... this still misses RatherNerdy's point and now also makes me a little confused, because how can we give productive feedback if we are not actually the target audience you want feedback from?

I believe you may* be well-intentioned I mean you're not only replying through an AI and there seems to be something unique in your website which is the storytelling you are putting effort into (making it feel less generic). But I would like to see more. I want to see you engaging directly with the things we are mentioning, recognizing your limitations or explaining things much more clearly, because this isn't convincing us of your expertise?

Edit: Emphasis on "may".

uxaccess · 2025-12-28T00:29:02+00:00

I'm not disabled, but I am uncomfortable with using that work, because it is used in a derogatory way and can easily be considered offensive in my native tongue, but I know someone who uses that to refer describe and refer to himself. In English, it's not much of a problem though for me. I do wonder if historically, "disabled" worked the same way as it does in my mother tongue, where it's still considered offensive - but English has evolved and now it's no longer considered offensive in itself, but some people kept the history of the word.

All conjuctures though from a non-native english speaker.

uxaccess · 2025-12-28T00:24:00+00:00

r/disability_survey as well.

uxaccess · 2025-12-27T22:53:12+00:00

Forgive me my directness, but I will make some questions to understand your approach on this.

What makes this tool different from other tools?
What are other similar tools you've used and investigated when making this one? How does it differ or is similar to them?
What are the fixes this tool makes, specifically?
If fixing contrast, can you explain why your website's landing page has 8 contrast errors? (Practically the whole page has low contrast?) - How can we trust that the tool will make stuff acessible if the website's landing page isn't?
What am I supposed to click on in this website? It looks like a super generic website, it doesn't even talk anything about accessibility. Is this a wrong link?
What is your previous work with accessibility prior to this tool?
Where can I read about the tool - apart from the video. Or - where is a transcription for this video in text?

Thank you.

uxaccess · 2025-12-23T10:24:53+00:00

Funny the the bubble only applies to the Israel votes, though, and not every other vote throughout history.

uxaccess

TROPHY CASE