A transcript of Episode 253 of UX Podcast. James Royal-Lawson and Per Axbom talk to accessibility legend Derek Featherstone about the current state of accessibility, role design plays, and how inclusion and diversity is where we are heading.
This transcript has been machine generated and checked by Bevan Nicol.
Transcript
Per Axbom
UX Podcast is funded by James and myself together with any contributions we can get from you, our listeners. You can contribute any amount you’d like whenever you like by visiting uxpodcast.com/support
Computer voice
UX podcast, Episode 253.
[Music]
Per Axbom
You’re listening to UX podcast coming to you from Stockholm, Sweden.
James Royal-Lawson
Helping the UX community explore ideas and share knowledge since 2011.
Per Axbom
We are your hosts Per Axbom
James Royal-Lawson
and James Royal-Lawson
Per Axbom With listeners in 197 countries and territories in the world, from Hungary to Mali.
James Royal-Lawson Derek Featherstone is chief experience officer at Level Access, who acquired Simply Accessible, which was the company Derek founded back in 1999. At Level Access, he’s helping set the vision and direction in their quest to make the web more accessible and inclusive, one screen at a time.
Per Axbom
And Derek joins us today as we look both backwards and forwards at how accessibility has changed and needs to change.
James Royal-Lawson
Hang with us right to the end for our post-Derek interview reflections and thoughts.
[Music]
Per Axbom
So here’s the thing, I think the three of us, we’ve been thinking and doing accessibility for a long time, I mean, almost 20 years, in your case, probably more. And I’ve actually left the accessibility space for a while and done other stuff within design and then come back and left and come back a few times. But I think over the past three or four years, people have started asking me more and more about accessibility. So it feels like I’m seeing this sort of revival in the interest in accessibility. Whereas I was frustrated for many years. But I know that you’ve been extremely focused on this for probably longer than I have. And so have you seen this trend where people get more interested in and less interested over the years as well?
Derek Featherstone
Yeah, I think it ebbs and flows, people get really excited about it, it gets some groundswell, people start taking a lot of action. And then, I don’t know if it’s exactly this, but something else new and shiny comes along, and it takes people’s attention away, and they focus on that. Or I find that, you know, I see a lot of people they get, maybe similar to you, they get really involved in accessibility and then for whatever reason, after three, four or five years, they, you know, they may be moved to another position, or they get tired of it, or they want to explore other things and they don’t maybe focus on accessibility anymore.
So, I don’t know, I think there’s this natural ebb and flow for people that aren’t maybe full-time committed to it, or – that sounds bad that I’m saying they’re not committed to it. But, you know, if it’s not their job, and they’re not dedicated to it as the thing that they do, maybe it’s easier for that to kind of, you know, fade away into the background and to pursue other interests. So I’m not sure, but I definitely have felt a bit of a resurgence over the last few years. And maybe there is a natural ebb and flow to it.
James Royal-Lawson
I think maybe one aspect of this is that we maybe failed over all these years to make accessibility part of the kind of baseline work they ever do. You know, you have to focus on it, you have to kind of dedicate yourself to it, rather than it be just something we do.
Derek Featherstone
Yeah, there’s, there’s a lot of people that ask me a question, and they say, ‘Should accessibility be its own thing? Or should it be a part of everybody’s job and something that everybody does?’ And they ask it like it’s an ‘or’ question; like it has to be one or the other. But it really should be both. Right? Like, accessibility should be part of everything, because it’s part of everybody’s job.
There’s, there’s connections to accessibility from literally every position that’s out there, at least in the digital world. There’s always a connection to accessibility. But we still need to have people that are dedicated to it, where it’s their specific thing that they specialize in, that they take on. It used to be that accessibility specialists, were people that did all the testing, right? And they did all the consulting and helping. Now, I think we’re moving to a model where we’re distributing the load of testing so that that doesn’t rest on the shoulders of, you know, a small team of four, or a team of one, or one person that – you know it’s not even their dedicated full-time job, but they showed interest in accessibility and therefore they’re the one that does all the accessibility testing.
I think we’re at a point where, you know, the load is being distributed and then accessibility specialists are moving more into coaching and mentoring roles, rather than ‘I’m going to do all the testing.’ So I think things have changed over time and people are starting to recognize that it should be part of everything that we do, but it does need space and time and thought on its own, where it isn’t part of everything else. And that, I think, makes it a little bit more mature as a practice.
James Royal-Lawson
But what kicked off this conversation was when I tweeted a few weeks ago now, asking designers how they make sure their designs are accessible, and how they make sure they end up being accessible when they’re actually implemented. And quite a few people maybe misunderstood what I was asking there because it more came from the situation where there’s different aspects to accessibility. I mean, not all of it is about colors and the visual part that you’re seeing. I mean, some of it is under the hood, involves maybe patching stuff, a bit of ARIA, or following certain standards of how you do stuff and testing to make sure it actually works. And something I noticed – and also get the feeling of as well as noticing it actually happening – is some people think that their job’s done when they kind of save a file out from sketch, or maybe once they’ve checked the contrast is okay, then hand it over. And that feels like we’re, you know, just not embedding it in the way that we could and should…
Derek Featherstone
Totally and I think that for years, accessibility was seen as the domain of the engineer of the developer, right. And that, if you were to ask somebody, how they fixed a particular accessibility issue, they would talk about the code that they needed to write to do it. But the reality is, as we mature as an industry, and as we start to learn more, and as we understand better how people with different types of disabilities, other than people that are blind and use screen readers, how other people with other disabilities use things or, or have very specific access needs. As we understand that better, we are starting to understand better the role of design in accessibility.
So it’s not just simply a list of bugs in the code that we need to go fix, right? It’s not as simple as that. When we first started talking about accessibility and the design side of things, it was about color contrast and the use of color alone. Now we’re starting to talk about – have been for probably, you know, six or seven years, but it’s something that doesn’t make its way into the mainstream, because not enough people know about it – topics like proximity. You know, proximity is a design principle in general, right. Two things that are related to one another should be close together, at least visually in the interface. And yet, we see all kinds of things where we have error messages, for example, we’ll have an error in a form and we will only get an error message up at the top of the form and we have nothing that is more local to the form field itself where the error actually happened. That’s an issue of proximity.
And we think things like, ‘Okay, well, I can code this in such a way that that error that’s up at the top of the page can be related to the form field that’s down in the middle of the page, which is cool. That works well for screen reader user, it can or it can work well for a screen reader user. But for someone with low vision, they are only seeing a small portion of the screen. So they are looking at that form field and they have filled it in, they’ve hit the submit button, and they’re not even seeing that error that is happening up at the top of the screen.
James Royal-Lawson
Is this because they’re using like ZoomText, so they’ve they’ve zoomed in to a really small part of the screen?
Derek Featherstone
Yeah, exactly. And so, you know, we did a usability study late last year, and I think there were eight people in the study and they all had low vision, and so they all use different tools like ZoomText or they might have used the native magnifier tools on a Mac or on Windows. And, of the eight people that participated, I think three of them had their screen magnified, or were using their magnifier tool to magnify their screen to 1200% magnification. Now, if you do some math on this: 200% magnification means that you’re seeing one-quarter of the screen at a time; 300% magnification means you’re seeing one-ninth of the screen at a time. If you keep extending that out, 1200% means somebody is seeing one-144th of the screen at any given time.
So the organization we were working with, they were actually testing their use of iconography, and for error messaging and other things like that. They were checking their placement of notifications. And they wanted to learn more about the messaging system and notification system that they had built into their entire platform. And all those things happened up in the top right corner of the screen and they were very difficult to see for someone with low vision. So that’s the kind of thing that is starting to happen, we’re getting a better understanding of what we need to do from a design perspective that is not just color contrast, it’s not just simply, ‘Here’s my sketch file, here’s my Figma file, and I’ve checked color contrast, therefore, as a designer, I’m done.’ Proximity and placement is one of the most significant things that we see from a design perspective that needs tending to, simply because when someone has low vision they’re seeing potentially a very small portion of the screen. And so we’ve got to come up with better mechanisms. So you’ll see, for example, an ‘Add to Cart’ button that will add to a cart up in the top right, you’ll get a little notification up in the top right of the screen or somewhere else. We’re starting to see people give visual feedback on the ‘Add to Cart’ button that shows that it was being added to the cart so that there’s like a little spinner that goes on the left of the button and once it’s actually successfully added to the cart, that little spinner will turn into a checkmark. So that there’s visual feedback right where the person is looking, even if they have low vision.
So we’re starting to see, you know, new needs… Actually, I say that – they’re not new needs, they were needs that were always there. They were just needs that we didn’t really understand or know enough about in order to just start delivering on those needs. So we’re seeing a lot of that where things like proximity are coming into it. And another one, this is a big one, we work with teams on this all the time: When we talk about keyboard interactivity, making a particular widget – a carousel, a date picker, or whatever – making that accessible and usable via the keyboard is traditionally the engineer’s job, the developers’ job.
I’m a big believer that that’s actually a thing that the keyboard interactions are so critical, they need to be designed. There can be no guesswork in it. We actually have a good established set of patterns that talk about, ‘Here’s how the keyboard should work for a date picker, for whatever.’ Those are all methodically designed. And when we get to a point where we’re using something that is maybe a little bit of a new pattern or something that’s a little bit different, we actually need the designer to spend the time, you know, do the research to figure out what needs to happen. And spend time specifying in some reasonable way, what the keyboard interaction should be like. Because if we don’t do that as designers, we hand that over to a developer. And this is, you know, no fault of the developer. They code it and they just go with what they think it should be, and that’s not always the way that it should be. So there’s a there’s a lot more to the design side than what we were thinking about, you know, 15 years ago, maybe even 10 years ago, where it was largely color contrast, color alone, those kinds of visual things. Now we’re thinking about this in much more thorough ways that take into account many more disabilities.
Per Axbom
I think you’re absolutely right. I mean, in my experience, we were constrained a bit about how we categorize disabilities. We always talk about seeing, hearing, and motor and cognitive, and we sort of think of those as single points of entry that we have to solve. Whereas when you actually learn and meet and talk to people with disabilities, you understand that many people who have a disability usually have multiple disabilities. You have these types of disabilities that are so seldom part of the conversation. Like my mind was blown when I learned about dyscalculia. And there was a study in Sweden around people having trouble with passwords. And you thought, ‘Well, people with visual impairments, of course, they have trouble with passwords.’ But it wasn’t mostly them. It was like, it was like 4% of the people with visual impairments, whereas 50% of people with dyscalculia had problems. Which means that you have trouble understanding numbers, but not only trouble understanding numbers: what that really implies is that you actually have trouble understanding distance, because that is expressed in numbers; and you have trouble understanding prices because that is expressed in numbers. So you have to try to find an anchor for them to understand something that they can relate to, like, the price of a liter of milk. So how many liters of milk does this thing cost? And you have to visualize that in totally different ways to help these people understand what we can quantify with a single digit for many other people. So just that aspect of disability was just ‘Wow, I’m learning so much, the more I dive into the subject.’
Derek Featherstone
This is perfect, you lead to exactly a point that I wanted to make. And this is probably the thing that I will be harping on and talking about for the next 15-20-30 years, however long I’m doing this – I’m guessing that this is going to be the thing that I’m going to continue to talk about: We don’t do enough work with actual people with disabilities. We don’t understand enough. We think, ‘Oh, we understand how this part works. We understand how a screen reader works, we understand how a magnifier works. Therefore, we don’t have anything else to learn from that particular group of people with that particular disability.’ And that is the most dangerous thinking that we can possibly have.
You know, accessibility – and I’ve said this in many talks before at conferences – accessibility is an outcome that we are trying to achieve. Inclusive design is actually a really sustainable and responsible and ethical process that we can use to get there. When people talk about, ‘Oh, accessibility is one of our core values.’ Inclusion should be your core value, and accessibility ends up being a really good byproduct of including people with disabilities. So I’ve turned a lot of my conversations over the last five years towards inclusive design. And a lot of people use the terms ‘inclusive design’ and ‘accessibility’ interchangeably, but they’re not the same thing. Inclusive design is a process, accessibility is an outcome. And we should be using inclusive design to achieve accessibility, rather than achieving accessibility by guessing, or by exclusively relying on past experiences. So as soon as we start thinking, ‘Oh, I know enough about this particular type of disability,’ that’s when you need to double down and do more. Because there’s so much that we miss if we just think about things and that we’ve already got it. We always have to be doing that inclusion work and doing that research to find out more.
James Royal-Lawson
Is this another one of the examples where the language we choose to adopt is crucial in how the thing and the topic is then solved or played out or implemented?
Derek Featherstone
Absolutely. The words that we use matter: the way that we describe a problem; the way that we talk with our colleagues about a problem. I was talking about this the other day with another group of people. The mindset, in a lot of places, about accessibility is that it’s like this fixed thing, right? We had WCAG 1.0 for 11 years, 12 years – I can’t even remember how long – and then we had another. We had WCAG 2.0 and then we had 2.1. There’s like a 10-year, on average, release cycle in between those. And that I think made a lot of people think that accessibility was this static thing – that we already knew everything we needed to know about accessibility. And a lot of people just didn’t realize that there’s a lot more to accessibility than the things that we have codified and put into the international standard. I think a lot of people don’t know that there are things that we know, but we can’t make it objectively testable, or we can’t achieve consensus on it, therefore, it doesn’t make it into our standards and guidelines. But that doesn’t mean that if it’s not on that list, it’s accessible.
And we saw this before WCAG 2.1, we used to see low contrast radio buttons in forms all the time – people would do a custom radio button – and then as soon as WCAG 2.1 came around, we have some guidelines around non-text contrast. So radio buttons need to have just as much contrast as text would, or it needs to meet some color contrast guidelines. Pre-2018, people would push back and say, ‘Well, we don’t need to do that, because this is a radio button. It’s not text.’ It’s not like that low contrast radio button was accessible before and isn’t now, it was never accessible. We just didn’t have a good set of guidelines around it to point to say, ‘It’s not accessible, and here’s why.’ So things that a lot of people, I think, misunderstand or haven’t maybe even thought of the nature of accessibility. And the fact that we are always learning new things, and we’re always trying to figure out how can we make this better for as many people as possible? And how do we put that into guidance for designers, for developers for testers? And I think that’s, that’s, you know, a big part of the conversation that’s missing.
James Royal-Lawson
You’re right. And of course, when you do have those defined standards, ones which even have acceptance criteria, then you really are pushing yourself to a world where it’s a tick box. And then when we’re doing procurement exercises and you’ve got to fulfill that standard, then it really does push you to achieve just that standard and those points and shuts the door on that broader conversation.
Derek Featherstone
It totally does. I push for this with as many clients as I can. They want to understand, and they want to know their current state, and so they will go through, and they will get audits and assessments done, and they will make some changes, and they want to know how they’re doing. And, you know, there’s definitely that aspect of it, you know: ‘How did you do against the standard? But the real arbiter of whether or not something is accessible is people with disabilities actually using it. And so I always recommend that there needs to be a research component to it. There needs to be research upfront to figure out and make sure that we’re solving the right problems.
But there also needs to be research throughout. And at the – I say end but it’s never really the end – you know, research at the end doing kind of a more formal usability study: ”How does this thing actually perform in its current state for people with disabilities?’ So that, to me, is a thing that I will continue to push for because that’s part of inclusive design: We’re including people with disabilities in the process all the way through, and that gives us the true best picture of what being accessible means – not just in the technical sense and meeting the guidelines, but in, ‘How does this work for real people that are trying to accomplish a task?’
Per Axbom
That is so so true. I mean, I love that. That metric is something we should all be thinking about – how many people with disabilities are actually using it? Because, I have clients now, because of the new web directive in the EU, of course, people are asking, ‘Are we adhering to the law?’ And that’s what people are concerned about. And that, of course, again, brings attention to the wrong thing. Because, we’re now sort of like, like James was saying, checking off boxes, and we’re saying, ‘We’re at a level of this.’ But you’re also actually, with a web directive, giving a way out. Because you can add to the web accessibility statement on your website, a writing or statement where we essentially say, ‘We know these parts of the website are not accessible, but we have a plan for it to do whenever, or you can ask us.’ So the law itself actually makes it harder to argue for the things that we’re talking about now, about actually caring for real people using the product, rather than if we’re adhering to these directives and the law as it is.
Derek Featherstone
This is the number one reason, I think anyway, that because that is not unique to the EU – this is a problem everywhere, and I say problem that’s maybe a little bit harsh. But one of the things that I think is really important to do is for organizations to understand that the work that they’re doing in accessibility is actually part of inclusion and it fits with – many organizations these days have a diversity, equity, and inclusion-type policy or a thing that they are trying to achieve – and we need to be able to tie the work that we’re doing in accessibility into those things. Because that takes it out of the realm of just being a thing where, ‘Hey, we’ve met the need, we’ve met the need, we’ve met the need.’ If we tie this into larger things like DEI-type discussions and organisations’ missions and vision and goals and objectives, then we have a greater chance of success there. So tying it into those diversity initiatives.
A lot of diversity initiatives that organizations around the world have tend to center around HR. And if you look at companies and their directives, or their mission and vision as it relates to diversity, it’s often about hiring, and it’s we’re talking about gender, gender identity, race, you know, ethnicity. Sometimes, if we’re lucky, we get some age-related things popping up into the diversity equation. But we’re still seeing a lot of people talking about diversity and inclusion without actually including people with disabilities as part of that conversation. So there’s, there’s a lot of work still to be done. I feel good, though, over the last few years, after the last, I don’t know, maybe five or six. This little resurgence is great in the tactical, you know, ‘How do we actually build things that are accessible?’ I think there’s more of a groundswell now too that is pushing us towards the inclusive design side of things, and diversity and inclusion, and making sure that people with disabilities are included in all of those conversations and in all of that work.
Per Axbom
It does sound so complex, though, because what we’ve been saying now, is that there are so many things to pay attention to. So as a designer, listening to this show, I’m thinking, How do I find the time with the work I already have on hand, to also fight for this? So if people aren’t paying attention to it in my organisation.
Derek Featherstone
That’s a great, that’s a great question. I think, you know, one of the things that we do, we need to build, you need to build that up, right. So I think a lot of things start small. We’ll, we’ll get teams to do one usability study with people with disabilities. And that is the starting point. And then people recognize and realize, wow, we learned a lot from that. This is incredibly valuable. How do we how do we continue this and so that it doesn’t just become, you know, you as a designer that is passionate about it, and interested in it, it doesn’t just become a thing that is all related to you, we need to get that living in everybody in the organisation as much as possible. So we have, we have things to do, in terms of demonstrating that and literally sharing recordings of, hey, here’s how this you know, here’s how these people with these different disabilities performed when they were, we’re looking at our looking at our website, or our web app, or our mobile app, or whatever it is, we get that kind of evidence in front of people that starts to make people take a little bit more notice.
And then that gets us to a point where we can start changing the conversation to say, like, hey, if we actually practice inclusive design, working with a bunch of people with different disabilities, we’re gonna have a whole lot of new ideas on what we should actually be building in our product. Anyway. There’s, there’s a lot of room for innovation that comes from working specifically with people with disabilities. And, and I would say, I don’t know if you’ve seen the Xbox adaptive controller from Microsoft, but that is a that is an Xbox. So the Xbox adaptive controller is an incredible device. It was designed and built, embracing the practice of inclusive design right down to the packaging so that’s definitely something go and read articles if you’re listening now go and read articles on the Xbox adaptive controller and how it has you know taking the gaming world by storm. It’s an incredible piece of of of evidence that the inclusive design process works. And it ends up creating a thing that is incredibly accessible. And, you know, kind of a really great experience for many people with disabilities. It’s not perfect, I’m sure, but what a What a great story.
Per Axbom
Yeah, fantastic. So we’ll definitely add that to the show notes as well. Derek, we don’t want it to be eight years before we have you on the show again. But it has been awesome having you and talking to you again, and hearing some updates and fantastic hearing also that you see this resurgence as well. And that we should keep going at it now. Really,
Derek Featherstone
Yeah, we have to write we this is, this is what I do. It’s we get people that are interested in it, we get them excited, we want to keep them excited, and and, you know, willing to do the work. I mean, that’s that’s what this is, we’ve all got to be willing to do the work so that everybody can use the things that we’re creating. And that’s, you know, that resonates with a lot of people. So I’m hoping that that continues. And and that we’ll just see this continue to improve. So I thank you for having me, too. I still I still can’t believe it’s been eight years. We definitely should like.. We can. We need to, we need to reduce that gap. I’m happy to come and talk with you with you all anytime you want to it’s always a lot of fun.
James Royal-Lawson
Excellent. Great. Derek, thanks for joining us.
Derek Featherstone
Thank you.
[Music]
James Royal-Lawson
I really liked what Derek said at the very beginning, or towards the beginning of the interview, when we asked about – well, we’re talking about acceptors accessibility and whose job it was, and so on – And Derek answered of course, it’s part of everyone’s job, or pointed out that, that you still need specialists. And that thinking, that point, is applicable to pretty much UX, or what we work with, in general, that we’ve had this trend. Well, everyone’s a generalist. And you know, the – we complained about how some of the different aspects of design work that we remember from “back in the day”, have disappeared a little bit. And they’ve been lost within other umbrellas. I think it’s really good to remember again, that, yes, we need to be aware of many, many different aspects of design. But we still need specialists to get us over the line or to get us up to that standard that we should be reaching that maybe we can’t reach ourselves.
Per Axbom
Yeah, and I think I think some people actually do think that accessibility is only for specialists and forget that they actually have responsibility to ensure that it actually lives up to the accessibility guidelines, or to accessibility and inclusion in general, as Derek is saying. So I think this point being about it being both and what you’re saying now is it’s hugely important because I mean, compared to copywriting, I mean, you in UX, you essentially need to understand copywriting is important. But for some copywriting, yes, you do need specialists as well.
James Royal-Lawson
I think in our we actually had a little chat with Derek after we finished recording. And one of the things we brought up there was was just about the kind of detail – what you actually need to hand over as part of your design process. And we discussed, and we’re aware of things like colors, that’s something we’ve we’ve adopted as designers, the colors is something we think about a fair bit. And we’re very aware of the contrast side of things. But Derek had a little list as well of that it’s important to think in hand over labels. And I brought up headings, and keyboard interactions, focus order. These are, these are part of our design work. Maybe not as visual all the time, but they’re there. And they’re important, because if you don’t, if we don’t hand them over, then someone else is going to – engineering is going to do them for us. And then it’s not designed in the same way,
Per Axbom
exactly, they’re part of the groundwork and the foundation and the baseline of what you actually need to hand over. And that also you always need to remember that you still need people to understand why they’re doing it, and not just how to do it. Because including people actually talking to people with disabilities, that is what helps you understand why you’re doing it, and helps you make decisions that cannot be encompassed by any guidelines, or frameworks or checklists. But that actually show if people can use your product.
James Royal-Lawson
Yeah. And that’s that’s the thing about having inclusion as a core value in your organization, rather than be just a process document, a standard to be checked off the list. A deliverable. It’s a What did he say inclusive design is a process and accessibility is an outcome.
Per Axbom
Exactly. I love that. It’s so it’s so spot on. And I think the point he brought up about how. I mean, I even feel that guidelines can be extremely dangerous in that people get a feel for or even they feel confident that they are actually reaching 100% accessibility because they check off all the points in the guidelines. Where as if you really work in the space as a specialist, you understand that there’s nothing that will guarantee 100% of accessibility, there’s just no such thing really, because you don’t know about everything that can happen. And the guidelines only cover the things that we have reached consensus on, and not the things we haven’t discovered yet. There’s always things to discover, you know.
James Royal-Lawson
So you do need to make sure your organisation has inclusion as part of its core belief and diversity initiatives are not just about who you employ, which is what we’ve Yeah, we’ve traditionally seen that HR makes, you know, wants to make sure we have a diverse workplace. But we got to take this beyond just who’s at the workplace, but what an organisation – so that organisations make products that improve diversity, but also use products internally that make the organisation more diverse.
Per Axbom
Exactly. And also his point about how do you know that your tool or software or service is accessible? Well, people with disabilities are using it. So in the end, if we’re not seeing diversity among our users, we’re failing.
James Royal-Lawson
Users and workflows, we’ve got to see diversity everywhere. And we got to demand the diversity. That’s where I’m a bit stuck Per. I don’t really know. I mean, how do we how do we go about, as designers, trying to get our organizations to be diverse and inclusive? in that manner?
Per Axbom
Oh, for me, it always comes down to are people even aware that we’re not inclusive? In most situations, I don’t think they are. So for me, it’s always about creating that awareness first and believing the best in people. But if you can’t believe the best in people at your own workplace, then you will be struggling.
James Royal-Lawson
So we’re saying we need to, we need to be prepared to have the conversation. It’s that again, isn’t it?
Per Axbom
Yeah, we need to actually yeah, hold up our hands, make a statement, and help teach people.
James Royal-Lawson
Yeah. Oh, so much to do.
James Royal-Lawson
Always.
James Royal-Lawson
Thank you for spending your time with us. links and notes, and the full transcript for this episode to be found on uxpodcast.com. Also in the link notes, Derek has some LinkedIn courses to do with accessibility. Yes, which there will be almost certainly good things to bite into.
Per Axbom
And for listening to next we have Episode 198. And when we actually do is to talk specifically about accessibility for designers. We do get a lot of questions, I think, being asked to talk specifically about accessibility, we sort of sometimes say, well, it’s woven into everything. But yes, of course, that you it’s when you want to become a specialist, if you really want to dive into the topic. That’s a good one to start with, as well.
James Royal-Lawson
Yeah, ’cause there we get hands on, we actually get into some details about what you need to do. to design things more accessible. And also, remember, you can contribute to funding the show by visiting uxpodcast.com/support.
Per Axbom
Remember to keep moving.
James Royal-Lawson
See you on the other side.
[Music]
Per Axbom
James
James Royal-Lawson
Per
Per Axbom
When does a joke turn into a dad joke?
James Royal-Lawson
I don’t know Per, when does a joke turn into a dad joke?
Per Axbom
When it pa.. bi.. I’m gonna do that again.
Per Axbom
[beep] James.
James Royal-Lawson
Per
Per Axbom
[Beep] James.
James Royal-Lawson
Per
Per Axbom
When does a joke turn into a dad joke.
James Royal-Lawson
I don’t Per, when does a joke turn into a dad joke?
Per Axbom
When it becomes apparent
James Royal-Lawson
Oh.
James Royal-Lawson
That really wasn’t worth waiting for, was it?
This is a transcript of a conversation between James Royal-Lawson, Per Axbom and Derek Featherstone recorded in October 2020 and published as episode 253 of UX Podcast.