 Welcome to accessibility without compromising creativity. A note about these slides. At the top of each one is a link. You'll find the slides that you can download and you'll also find all the links that you can click on. It's at the top of each slide. It's at overnightwebsite.com slash WCUS. Websites are boring now because of accessibility. Now, this was an actual comment by an actual person about an accessibility topic on Facebook. And I disagreed so strongly that I created an entire presentation about it. While we can make some really boring sites, if you wanted to, we can also make some really incredible sites for people while still being accessible. Defining building sites as a limitation with accessibility is doing a disservice to your clients and the people who use their sites. It does matter how creative a site is if no one's going to use it. If it doesn't convert, if no one stays on it, does that make it creative? If no one likes it? So I want to thank you all for coming to listen to me use words out loud and in person. As you heard, I am the founder of Kinetic Iris and Overnight Website. Yes, it is built overnight. I've been developing WordPress websites for over a decade and I've spent about the past three years diving pretty deep into accessibility. As a custom developer, I spend a lot of time taking designs and turning them into websites. So I have a pretty good idea of what's common, what's boring, what's kind of a pain in the butt and what's unique. So that's kind of my qualification for talking about design as a developer. So as a quick overview about what we'll go through today, we're going to start with how accessibility relates to design and why it's important. We'll go over some examples of designs that are both fun and accessible. And then we'll briefly go into some tips and takeaways at the end. You can't put limits on my creativity, man. This is probably an objection and I hear you. It's a little cheeky, but I hear you and you're saying, I want to have uninhibited creativity. I want to make the best thing I can make. I need to design freely. Accessibility is guidelines and rules and regulations. And wow, that sounds super creative and fun. Thanks. I'm not here to tell you how dare you, you're wrong, you're doing everything incorrectly. I'm just here to present you with an opportunity to do what you're doing better and for an opportunity to grow. If you feel like you need freedom and uninhibited creativity, I would ask you if you are, in fact, just sitting down using only your brain and your divine creation, those that you've developed over the years, you have experience, you have color theory and font pairings and inspiration that you've used over the years from what you've already made. You've made strides to make it better. You know it works and what doesn't. So what about the requirements to the project? You're not just sitting down at a desk with a blank slate. You're using everything that you've developed over the years to make something really great. And this is just another opportunity to build in some more tools. We have to find a way to think about accessibility not as a long list of rules and bugs that you need to fix, but as an opportunity to incorporate some new challenges. How can we push the envelope and present users with an experience that they're really going to love and still be able to use? Websites may seem boring or all the same. So where does this idea of boring actually come from if it's not that they're just accessible websites? Well, on some level, we do things because they work. Things have become headline button in the hero for a reason because it converts. And then we also have templates and patterns and frameworks and things that have contributed to this similar idea across websites. But ease of use does often mean a decrease in complexity. And so can we have a world that combines usability with that innovation and creativity? There are basically two sides here that we're trying to reconcile. We have that creativity aspect, the art, the design, the fun experiences, and then the innovation and all that good stuff that keeps you getting up in the morning to make a new website. And then you have the consumability aspect of it, the actual website that somebody is using, the more dry aspects of the site, the site that I work on. People are interacting and visiting this website, and so that's more of the sort of consumability aspect of this. So how do we sort of marry these two ideas? Accessibility isn't about accommodating the minority at the expense of the majority. It's about respecting users and making the internet more usable. There's a time and a place for everything. You can go ahead and open up a code pen and go bananas. You can experiment on whatever you want to as long as you want, but then you have to take that and figure out how to fit it into a package that works for as many people as possible, while still having a really awesome engaging experience, and so that's our challenge here. On this slide, we have four columns, and we're going to go over just a few facts, and I'll read them out to you, and there's going to be links under each one. Like I said, you can go to overnightwebsite.com slash WCUS, and you'll be able to click on these links and read more about the articles. So an estimated 1.3 billion people, that's about 16% of the global population, currently experience significant disability. Then you increase that number by including people that either don't have a diagnosis, they don't have something that's classified as significant disability, or their brain just works differently, that number then increases, and then we increase that number again, because by 2030, all baby boomers will be older than age 65. So you have a very aging population, and then of course disabled people have money too. They're buying websites for you to create, they're buying products that you sell on your website, and they're buying gifts for people. So like I said, there's links at the bottom where you can read more about each of those things. One last stat that we're gonna have here is by web aim, they put out the web aim million, this is the fifth year they've done it, and according to them in 2023, 96.3% of homepages had detected WCAG2 failures, and that's over the last four years, that's only decreased by 1.5%. Making accessible sites is in the minority. Websites cannot be boring because of accessibility, because websites aren't accessible. So it's just a little food for thought there, and as we dive into some of these examples, we've established our reality, and we are convinced that, hey, maybe I can incorporate some accessibility into my design, tell me how to do that. We're gonna look at what these examples did, we are going to look at why it works, why it's accessible, and some of them have some opportunities for improvement. This kind of reinforces the idea that accessibility is a process. You do not have to put out a website that is accessible by everybody, and it's never gonna go wrong, and it's a process, it's okay. So for the sites that I'm gonna show you, I primarily used keyboard testing. I used the screen reader for some things I found questionable, but I'm not endorsing anything that I see or show you. I didn't do a full audit on these sites, and in fact, a few of them do have some accessibility issues. We're primarily talking about design here. So if there's something I didn't find or didn't call out, that's pretty likely, actually. So as we're going through these examples, think about how you can incorporate accessibility into your process. So for a couple of these, we're actually gonna go through the website. The first one here that I have is the ACLU website. I really liked their use of color. I find it really impactful without assaulting my eyes. It's cohesive as well, and they're using colors that are bolder, but still readable. And not just on this hero area here, which uses a red, and then they skillfully use that background image. But if we scroll down a little bit, we're gonna see a section that has, they use the duotone, but then they also have a really nice dark blue image with some text over it. And it makes it so that it's still interesting to look at, but still readable. Now it is a little bit hard to see on the screen here, but it's got the statue of liberty behind the history there. One thing that was really nice about this site is at first I came across this list of buttons. If I scroll up a little bit, there's, I don't know, a dozen buttons here. And I'm like, oh boy, they just stuck a list, a bunch of links in a group. But when I looked at the code, it was actually a list of links, an actually coded list. So it's kind of a really interesting example of how you can design things and give it to a developer and say, hey, if I give you this, is this something we can make accessible or should I adjust it? And so you can sort of keep things a little bit more visually interesting than just having a big long list of these links. And it makes it so that when somebody comes to the page that isn't visually looking at this, they can skip over it. Because if I'm over here scrolling down this site, as a visual user, you may not realize it, but I'm scrolling, I'm skipping over stuff. I'm scrolling and skipping over this big group of buttons because I'm like, I'm not engaged in this yet. I don't know what you're doing. And so I'm scrolling down a little bit more to see what else they've got to offer. So I thought that was kind of interesting, a neat way to marry this idea of a bunch of buttons with a list. Now, my recommendation would be, do you need all those buttons? Maybe pair it down a little bit to make somebody more likely to click on it, but that's more of a marketing conversion issue than it is a design issue. One thing that I did notice was if we scroll down a little bit more, we're gonna come across a form. And I can understand why they've laid this form out. We have a headline, we have some text, we have a form that's like kind of nicely designed in a little box. So all the fields all line up really nicely and then they have a disclaimer at the bottom. When I was tabbing through this site, you can tell that the designer designed it this way and then the developer had to come in and make sure that they could read the disclaimer before submitting the form without interrupting sort of this flow of box. So it actually hijacked my tab order a little bit because I tabbed down into the disclaimer and then I tabbed back up into the first name, last name. Now it's a very clever way for a developer to solve a problem with what I assume is a very large organization. So there's probably a lot of chain of command, a lot of things going on. And so they've solved the problem without actually addressing the issue. So this is a really good opportunity to bring up the point that examine why you do things. So by putting this disclaimer at the bottom, it may now hijack the tab order so somebody who is using a screen reader can get it in the right order. But me visually, if I'm not paying close enough attention, I'm submitting that form and not reading that disclaimer until after I've submitted the form. Is it really gonna disrupt your design enough to stick it at the top instead? And to me the answer is no. To me it's much more important that they have this higher up so that you can read this privacy policy that you click on. And this is actually a theme throughout some of these other pages. If we go over to one of these other pages here. And again, they're using color, we're over at the atlu.org slash action. Now they're using color, it's bold, take action, it's maroon color. And then if we scroll down, we'll see another form that has a much longer disclaimer at the bottom. And then all this empty white space on the side. So it's a really good opportunity to get creative with placement of things. Why not just stick the disclaimer on the side? Join us, stay up to date. Here's a really long disclaimer and here's a nice little box of forms. So I do wanna bring up the form fields. They are the labels. They are there all the time. They don't disappear. It's maybe not my most favorite way for them to go about doing this because I think it still sort of masks the idea that this is a first name, enter your info, this is a last name, enter your info. And so in order to keep this nice box, they put the labels inside, but at least at the very least they are labels and they do stay there the whole time. So it's kind of an interesting way to take these traditionally really contentious topics between developers and designers where it's like a lot of designers just get rid of the label, just use the placeholder and developers are like, you really shouldn't do that. And so this is kind of a nice compromise. It's a really great way to get creative about some of these issues. But yeah, so I would say that examine why you do certain things. Why are you sticking the disclaimer at the bottom? Is that really gonna be in the best interest of people consuming the website? But overall, I think I really enjoyed the site, the use of colors. Again, we bring in the maroon, but in a different way. We have a nice pink color. So there's an opportunity for some of the pages. Again, this is probably a really big organization. And so some of the pages do need to be updated into this new brand or whatever. But one other thing I do wanna bring up about this site is that this navigation, there was a whole presentation on navigations previous to this. It's accessible, I could go through the items without having to go through every single little sub item. But then if we go over, they have this other menu item. If I hover over our work or tab over and enter into our work, they have almost like a mega menu-esque without having to resort to using this giant mega menu. And I think that because they're only using it in one menu item, Subnav, I kinda think it's a really good use of the space because court battles, Supreme Court cases, federal advocacy, these all sound really technical. So it gives a little bit more understanding to each one of these items. So I thought again, that was a really creative use of the space, of the info. I think it's something that could probably warrant a really big discussion between designers, developers, accessibility experts about whether or not this is good. But I think the point here is that you can kind of do whatever you want as a design and bring it to people and say, hey, I think this is a cool idea. What do we all think? And accessibility should be about a discussion and about ease of use. So this was the first site that I came across that I really enjoyed a lot. If I come over here, we're gonna go to a second site that I loved a lot. And it's gonna be kind of interesting because let's close out ACLU. And if we go over to this MIT Climate Science, Risk and Solutions site. I first came across this when I was doing my research to bring sites to you. And I kind of dismissed it first because you have a menu in the center and then you have a second menu over on the right. And I'm like, that's too many menus. Can't you pare it down? But then when I was narrowing things down and I revisited this one because I really loved the colors, it's one of my favorite blues. It kind of looks black on the screen over here but it's really nice, pleasant blue. It's one of my favorite colors. And so I kind of revisited it and I was like, wait a minute. This is a whole website that's basically kind of like a textbook on a website. So what they've done here is when I tab through, I can get to the sub-nav here and then I can skip right over it and go over to this much smaller list of links. But when I open up this navigation, again, really pleasant to look at. Now, there was a micro animation there that wasn't too intrusive, which I kind of liked because it's such a dull sort of like topic, everything's really long, a lot of text. Having these little animation elements, it's really easy in like a tool like Figma or anything else to just toss on an animation. But if you use a little bit of thought about it and how to implement it, does it come out from the middle? Does it come out from the side? How can we not fade in all of the text all at once but sort of do something that is still consumable? The one thing about this site is it doesn't respect when I turn off, when I decide to tell my computer, hey, I want you to reduce motion, it doesn't actually stop those animations. So again, every site has an opportunity for improvement. But so this menu that I've opened up here, it has two columns and it has a left side that is sticky, that gives you a link to the PDF, it gives you a little bit of info about the person who wrote it and then on the right, it's kind of like a table of contents. Table of contents are boring. This, I didn't mind looking at. And I think it's because of the use of color, because of the font choices, because of the separation between each of the sections and subsections with the lines in between them. Again, anytime you put thought into something, something really fun could happen. So again, I really, as I got further into this site, I kind of liked it a lot. So if we go into one of these items here, one of these chapters that they have, some of the grass, some of the interactive things, again, aren't quite accessible. And I think Warren's a much larger discussion about how to make interactive elements like this actually accessible and usable for somebody that doesn't use a mouse. But they also do a ton of things right. So this page, if you saw on the side that scroll bar, it's extremely long because each one of these chapters is broken up into subsections. But if you tab or hover over this navigation item, it gives you arrows. So right now, I hovered over the toggle. There's a right arrow to go to the next section. But now, when I hover over it, I can go back or forward. It's a really clever way of giving a user multiple ways to navigate through a site, especially when it's really long like this. So when you're using a traditional website, you can have like a back to top button or you can have websites have the skip to content link. So there's various ways to access information. And in this case, they've really put a lot of thought into how can we make it super easy for people to go through this site in multiple ways. They can scroll, they can go back and forth, they can open up the navigation and click on different parts of the page and go to different places. So a lot of thought was put into the user and how they're gonna use the site. So instead of defining this as a limitation, oh, well, why can't they just read through this whole page? We want them to see all this information and if they have to, they can open up the navigation and click on a link. Okay, well, why don't we make it easy for them? It's another opportunity to design. How do we incorporate arrows? How do we do all of these little things that just enhance the design? It's not a limitation, it's not boring by any means. So each one of these sections has different elements too. It's varied, kind of like the ACLU site. When you scroll down the page, each of the sections had a little bit of a different layout without feeling too overwhelming, without feeling too disjointed. This is a lot more cohesive, obviously. But if you scroll down a little bit, we have some sections that you can listen to. So if we find one, let's find one here, let's go. There we go. So I really don't like when they change the mouse. I will often use the mouse to follow along when I'm reading, I use it to, but I'll also use the top of the screen to read as well. In this case, I don't know if I mind it so much because it's identifying that you can listen to it. And I think I don't mind it because I'm nerding out a little bit. So again, I really would be interested in starting a conversation about this. Is it really important to call out that you can listen to this or is it more important to not touch the user cursor? So again, let's have a conversation about that. I'm always available for nerding out about this stuff. So I love your opinion, but basically if I click on this, I'm gonna try to pause it really quickly. But you can see, so I'm gonna pause this, but you can see when I played the listen, it started highlighting the text as I was reading it. So does that then make it so that it's okay to hijack the cursor just over this one section because they're not doing it for the whole site. That's a terrible idea. But for this one little section, it's highlighting it for me while it's reading it. So does that then make up for them taking my cursor away? I don't know. I think it's worth the discussion. But so again, we're really invested in the user and how they use this site and giving them not only an engaging experience, but one that they can absorb. So they can listen to it, they can read it. They can read along while they listen to it. They can listen only. They can make it super small and read it on their phone. They can scan the site and go all over the place with that additional navigation. So we're giving the user as many ways as possible to consume this in whatever way that they feel the best. And again, if we're giving somebody something that they are happy with using, does that make it more creative? I think so. They also have other elements that they're using. So again, it could potentially be a really dull topic if you're not super into climate science. So they're incorporating some little illustrations. They have a little illustration of the person who's voicing this part. They have illustrations of each of the people that's being called out on the little slider here. The slider is fully accessible. They're using the arrows that are nice and big, a nice big click area for somebody to scroll through this. I can tab over to it. I can read it. I think this is really cool. And then if I'm scrolling down, because we're listening to something and it could still be playing while I'm going through other things, they've made the audio player sticky on the bottom there so that I don't lose where I was. So it's all about the user and making things that are fun to look at and fun to consume. So I really loved this site. Again, if I scroll up a little bit here, there's this globe that's spinning in the background behind. Kind of a really cool way to, again, make people engage with the content. It's a little question quiz that takes up the whole screen, makes the items really easy to click on. It's a multiple choice question, but there's no way to pause that spinning in the background. So there's these little things that, again, you're designing for multiple use cases. There's more opportunity to design. You can design more things now. You can design for static. You can design for when somebody's okay with the animation. So again, really thoughtful. A couple of ways that they can improve, but overall, adding a couple of alt text for some SDGs, reducing motion, I think that would just kick this site over the edge. So overall, I really, I loved this and I'm actually going to revisit this and read a bunch about this site. So we're going to go back now. Those are the only two sites that we're going to sort of go over live. We're going to go back, I think. So the next couple that I'm going to present are basically mostly design related. This first one is worldwildlife.org. This site is less than accessible, but they're doing some really great things design-wise. So again, navigations are really difficult. We want to provide a user a quick and easy way to go through the site and different pages and select different things. And so they have only a couple of items on the left side there, which is great, focused. And then they have on the right side a couple of things that look like buttons. And then they both have a dropdown navigation. They both have the button text on the left and then a little plus sign on the right. And then when you open it up, it has a very contrasted list of links and then it has a border around it. And that border is the same color as the button. The two buttons are two different colors and the border around it changes the color. So it's these little elements that you can inject into sites to make things a little more interesting. How can you incorporate the fact that you need a plus button next to something that opens up? How about we just make it part of the button? How about we make it called out? We have these two items that are, you know, have a whole list of links that you can go to. Let's make it so that it's a button and somebody's likely to click on it. This second screenshot here that I have of this site is on the right side of the screenshot. There are these three like stats. When you click on them, they sort of, they flip over to some text. It is not screen reader accessible and it's only sort of keyboard accessible. But again, this is a really cool opportunity to take something that's kind of boring and accordion with some stats and inject some design into it. And so you take this design, you bring it to a developer and you say, can we do this in a way that's accessible that when the accordion opens, it's not gonna bump down all the rest of that content and make things move around and disjointed. Each one of those three things could have a different length of text and then when they each open, it's all floating all over the place. So could this possibly be a solution to that? Could this be something that's a little more exciting to look at? You still get some information from here even if you don't wanna open them. And then when you wanna open them and read more, they have instead of a plus button, they have the little I info icon because you wanna learn more not so much open an accordion or a toggle. Could this be something that's kind of interesting to use? I think it's a really cool place to start with a discussion with the developer. Like I said, it's not accessible, but it could be. The rest of the site has some good use of color. There's a lot of opportunity to bring in the inner pages to have some of the character and the style that the homepage has. But overall, I think it's a good example of a couple of really fun opportunities to be able to inject some personality into sites. Our next example here, I don't want to say it because I don't know how to say it. D-Z-A-N-G-A-S-A-N-G-H-A.org. I'd rather spell it than get it wrong. So this design, there's three screenshots here. You have one on the top that has some text and then like a slider, again, not accessible. And then you have two screenshots on the bottom that are two different hero designs. It's not as unique as some of the other ones we've seen. But it's kind of a good opportunity to bring up that not everything has to be reinventing the wheel. I think it's doing a really great job of utilizing this blob shape in a lot of different ways. So the first screenshot has it as sort of a background on a section as an accent. The second screenshot of the first hero area has the blob shape as the image and a blob behind it. Then you have a hero area that has an entire half of the page be the image and then the other side has text with the blob shape. So it's like you take the brand and you inject some personality into it. One thing I want to call out about this site is that it has the header that's typically on top on the side. Now, a lot of times I would advise somebody to stop and think about, is that really necessary? Again, we're trying to give somebody an experience that is expected but still fun to use. I think in this case, I could be convinced that it's okay. I think we're highlighting these animals, we're trying to get people to be interested and invested in these animals and the way that they've laid out these pages to me, it kind of feels like a book. Like a picture book that you'd have on a coffee table and you're reading about these things. So maybe it was actually thought out and consciously chosen to have this thing on the side that we don't necessarily care so much about these items, the logo, whatever. Keep that on the side, keep that out of the way. We want to highlight this giant picture of this animal. So again, any kind of design, if you put thought into it and you have a reason for doing something, a screen reader is going to be able to, as long as you get through the site and the first thing you get to is that header area. If it's on the side, I think that's okay. Now again, this site is not accessible to use using the tab key because you can get to the links but it doesn't actually open the side drawer. So again, implementation is totally separate from design. If you get yourself a good developer, if you get yourself a good team, you can collaborate and incorporate a lot of really interesting things and interesting discussions, bring people in. The more people that have eyes on something, the more feedback you're gonna get. And then our last example here is of npr.org. I wanted to find a typically really boring site. I wanted to find something that had a boring topic. Just, it's npr, it's national, great. But how do they make something that's interesting and designed and feel put together? Is it any less creative because it's a boring topic? I would argue no. I think it's a lot harder to design something creatively that needs to be really simple and straightforward. So on here I have two screenshots of the homepage at the top area and a little bit scrolled down. And you can see that they've varied the layout. So one way to go about designing something creatively when there's so many images is to vary the layout a little bit. You have the latest item at the top. It's a little bit more traditional, like I said, but they've put a little bit of a subtle shadow around some of these containers. They're using images everywhere. And fun fact, they have a text-only version of the site. So because there's so many images and it's such a pain in the butt, you can go over to the text version and it's the list of the links. So again, there's a lot of ways to incorporate accessibility that may not include design, but include design conceptually. So they have this sort of text page. It still has to have some kind of design. And again, it's another opportunity to design something that's super bare bones. There's a list of links that don't look like it's from 1995. So one other thing that I wanted to bring out about this site is I'm really interested to find out if what people think about when you tab into this, it actually gives you a skip to content link and then it gives you a keyboard shortcut link for the audio player. So I'd be interested to find out if people actually find that helpful. I think it does because it's a radio station. Part of their thing is audio. And so what I really like is that they've respected my ad blocker. They have that whole section on the side that were ads. They don't show up at all. They have the audio player that stays stuck. They've used color in a way that is really subtle to not distract from the images and the main reason why you're on here. So you have the red and the blue and so they put a lot of thought into it. And so there's a lot of interesting things here that I think you could argue are actually designed. So where do we go from here? There are all of these additional components that you can specifically design to make your site stand out. People are gonna be visiting your sites in all kinds of ways and methods and you can't control that, but you can design for it. So it's important to see the opportunity here. See all of the small elements that you can design. See all of the ways that you can inject personality and design into something that is seen as boring. And again, think deeper about what you're doing. Does that text actually need to be underlined when it's not a link? What are you trying to convey when you underline something? Are you trying to show emphasis? And how can I do that in a more creative way? So it's about making smart choices and examining why you do things. So to get started, how can we, you got it. Danielle, I'm convinced. I wanna figure out a way to incorporate some of this design and accessibility together. Revisit stuff you've already done. There's tons of groups out there. There's tons of resources out there. Take one little element, one thing at a time. Take a header, take a nav, take a logo. Take one little element of something you've already done and figure out how to make it accessible. Is it accessible? Should I change it? How can I make this more creative? How can I do it this way? Can I do it that way? Part of design and development and websites is trying stuff. So it's all about just throwing stuff on a page, seeing if you like it, seeing if other people like it and does it work. And find a buddy, find multiple buddies. Find people that are gonna look through your designs and not audit them, but give you direct feedback. Hop on calls with them, work together and talk to people. The more that we can all work together about these things, the more that we're all gonna be happy with the designs that we make. And then finally, some resources. There's a list of four links here. I have them all on overnightwebsite.com slash WCUS. The Accessibility Weekly series this year by Amber Hines in the Admin Bar Group by Kyle Dueson. I think it's a really great way that it's sort of this just rainbow of random things about accessibility that you can do like sort of little deep dives in and then if you can see that and go, hey, is that something I can incorporate? Then you can learn even more about it. So I find that a really fun series to interact with and talk about and it starts discussions. Again, it starts discussions that create presentations. They also have WordPress accessibility meetup. They have all of their past meetups there. So again, there are all kinds of various topics that are out there. I really like this design specific guidelines item that I've called out. It's not dash checklist.intopia.digital. It's basically a list of all the requirements but you can filter them. And so they have things tagged as design. So you can take something that they list there and then just pick one. Again, pick one thing at a time. So color contrast, that's already a design thing. How can I deep dive into that? Pick one. And so I really like this because you can kind of go at your own speed. You can flip through it and you can pick one. I have started a blog on my site. It's a little small right now but it does have an accessibility category. So if you check back there, there will be continuous new items there. If you wanna contact me about something that you saw here, that you saw somewhere else and I can make a blog post about it. Oh, we can have a discussion about it. So those are some of the resources that you can go to. You can Google stuff. You can reach out to people, ask people. That's, if you take nothing else away from here, it's try stuff. Try stuff and see what people think about it. What I'm doing here, like I said at the beginning, is not to tell you that you've done something wrong or to tell you that you're doing things inefficiently or that you're not, how dare you not consider people. It's really just an opportunity to be more proactive about stuff, to think about others and to think about the user. Ultimately, websites are to be used. So we have to make it fun to use, fun to look at and easy to use and easy to look at. So I don't know if we have any time right now. We have about five minutes. If anybody has any questions, otherwise, you can go to overnightwebsite.com slash links. Yeah, it looks like we have a couple of questions. Oh, there we go. Hi. Hi, this is Kevin Andrews from Georgetown. Great talk. I had a couple, just a couple of comments, thoughts on it. I just wanted to say, so as a practitioner who is blind, I found it very, very relatable to my work. You mentioned, you know, the importance of teamwork and at the university, we say teamwork makes the dream work. So, and it does. I would just say, I think it's really important to, it's a reminder today, some of the sites we were looking at and you were discussing really to bring in the practitioner from the get-go, right? So from looking at wireframes, looking at some of these early prototypes, really bringing them in early to avoid maybe some of the busyness that we were experiencing. But I really appreciate this talk because, you know, a lot of times accessibility, people think it's just boring, like you said. And that doesn't have to be the case. But thank you for mentioning the teamwork aspect and really considering all of the aspects. I'd love to connect with you further. Yeah, definitely. I think it's important too because I feel like maybe a little part of our brain is like nervous to bring somebody in, right? Because they're gonna be like, oh, they're just gonna tell me that I can't do this or can't do that or can't. I feel like most of the time people are really open to stuff. And if you open yourself up to that feedback and, you know, willing to be told that you're wrong and ask how you can fix it, that's gonna really open you up to a whole world of design possibilities. Hi, I'm Christopher Anderton from Northeastern University. My main question is how do you deal with designers who are like motion basically? My main concern is motion. I see a lot of sites that people get like, they'll test for the colors. They might even test for like X, to have things, everything. But then they'll get really over eager with the motion. Like every time you scroll down every new thing fades from nothing up there as you're scrolling down and it's hard. And they're things that are really easy to sell to like a board that you're trying to get a site approved by because they look at it and there's a lot of flash and everything. How do you, like what's your take on how much motion is too much motion for things and how do you sell that to the outside stakeholders? Sure, so when I'm approaching something, a lot of times I'll do a lot of research about it first. And so I'll have a little bit of ammo if you will to say about how not just people who don't like motion but just regular old people, maybe they're on a train, maybe they're somewhere else. And the motion combined with scrolling, combined with moving text in is kind of disorienting. So if I come in as somebody where like I said, you pick a topic, so our topic here is animation and you go, okay, how can I make this better? What can I do and what shouldn't I do? What's great for users, what's not good for users? So I find that sort of mitigating things by having compromises, right? So you're not saying don't use animation, you're saying use animation smart. So you don't want somebody to have an entire paragraph of text with headings and including the image sliding in from the left and then the next section sliding in from the right and then the left and right. Nobody's gonna read it and then by the time they scroll the section's already gone and hasn't scrolled in it. So there's complexity there that I think is making it harder for the users to use. And if you bring it down, a lot of times if you bring it down to do you want somebody to read your content or do you want somebody to scroll and then leave? A lot of times if you just sort of bring it down to that base reason for having a website in the first place, that's kind of a good place to start a discussion and then just be open to questions. So if somebody is gonna push back, you can say I totally hear you. It's sort of, you have to sort of learn various communication skills almost where you sort of say I totally get it. It seems a lot of fun, right? I want to incorporate a lot of this animation. I want this to be fun for somebody to look at. But we also want it to be looked at. So you sort of compromise by saying okay, well can we fade in this one image on the side and leave the text? And then like I said, you then as a developer incorporate those other things that you do like respecting the reduced motion and all of that other stuff. So you just sort of use your brain as the developer to implement stuff once the compromise has been made about the content. That's how I approach things. Great, well that's all the time we have for questions. Danielle, thank you so much. Thank you.