I met a blind programmer at a conference back in the 80's, and had a long talk with her and how she did it. I was amazed. Ever since, I've wanted to ensure products I've worked on were accessible to the blind.

It's one thing to follow guidelines, it's another to have someone who relies on a screenreader actually try it out. If anyone here uses a screenreader, or knows someone who does, please give dlang.org a try and let us know about how we can improve their experience with it.

On Sunday, 23 September 2018 at 22:07:36 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> I met a blind programmer at a conference back in the 80's, and had a long talk with her and how she did it. I was amazed. Ever since, I've wanted to ensure products I've worked on were accessible to the blind.
>
> It's one thing to follow guidelines, it's another to have someone who relies on a screenreader actually try it out. If anyone here uses a screenreader, or knows someone who does, please give dlang.org a try and let us know about how we can improve their experience with it.

By the top of my head I can already say there are some things that don't follow accessibility standards like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be replaced by strong tags instead. Probably a few more cases too, just a real quick check.

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
> like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be replaced by strong tags

The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not content. Their use is correct.

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
>> like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be replaced by strong tags
>
> The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not content. Their use is correct.

HTML tags are usually fine. JS can cause problems. Some older posts (in order of appearance):

https://forum.dlang.org/post/avyxxydzbghsjmsucark@forum.dlang.org
https://forum.dlang.org/post/arkvmtfljjtjpfrccqbu@forum.dlang.org
https://forum.dlang.org/post/wcnwyqugkcqkkyeghccb@forum.dlang.org

But I think browsers / screen reading software have improved a lot in this regard. I dunno how react (native) and the like are handled though.

On Sunday, 23 September 2018 at 22:07:36 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> It's one thing to follow guidelines, it's another to have someone who relies on a screenreader actually try it out. If anyone here uses a screenreader, or knows someone who does, please give dlang.org a try and let us know about how we can improve their experience with it.

Well, one can use some text-based browser and check out how it looks there, `lynx` for example. Of course this cannot replace a real screenreader but it gives some suggestion how a page with no styles looks like.

So, how does it look like?
- nav + search and the intro are fine. Then some mixture of text and code examples follows
- news, learn, docs, ... sections are fine
- "Fast code, fast." is again a wild mixture of text and code examples (there's no hide/show, everything is collapsed)

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 16:02:51 UTC, 0xEAB wrote:
> everything is collapsed)

should mean "everything is expanded", of course

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
>> like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be replaced by strong tags
>
> The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not content. Their use is correct.

I disagree:

https://achecker.ca/checker/index.php

See:

"1.4 Distinguishable: Make it easier for users to see and hear content including separating foreground from background.

Success Criteria 1.4.4 Resize text (AA)

Check 116: b (bold) element used.
Repair: Replace your b (bold) elements with em or strong.
Error Line 430, Column 67:
<b>D</b>
Error Line 432, Column 18:
<b>D Programming Language</b>"

On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 05:57:06 UTC, bauss wrote:
> On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>> The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not content. Their use is correct.
>
> I disagree:

That doesn't address the argument. A program can't know whether a <b> tag is part of the presentation or content. The argument stands.

On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
>> like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be replaced by strong tags
>
> The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not content. Their use is correct.

And also representation should generally be done with <span>

On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 at 06:01:58 UTC, bauss wrote:
> On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:50:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>> On Monday, 24 September 2018 at 03:16:50 UTC, Bauss wrote:
>>> like the use of b tags on the front page, they should be replaced by strong tags
>>
>> The two usages of <b> are part of the presentation, not content. Their use is correct.
>
> And also representation should generally be done with <span>

It's more important how the screen reading software parses and represents it to the user. Screen readers build their own DOM in the background. So don't get lost in semantic details that may have no bearing whatsoever on accessibility. I remember that a while ago "<em>" was not supported by all browsers, that's why devs opted for "<b>" or "<span style='font-weight: bold;'>" (which is the one I prefer).

Usually, if a homepage is marked up normally in bog standard HTML, then users of screen readers have no problems reading the content. Problems may arise when it comes to things like code examples that are somehow handled by JS or the like.

I'd say you start testing the general examples, the language specs and the library documentation. If they're not accessible, then a visually impaired user cannot use D.

This said, I was working with a blind person a couple of years ago (I think it was 3 years ago) and he used D for one of his assignments, he never had a problem with the documentation.