This website morphed its more narrow scope beyond writing, handwriting, and typing. We’re now focused more broadly on Psychological disorders and mental health. What defines us beyond that is:
- A commitment to 100% W3C Guidelines for accessibility.
- Pragmatic approach missing elsewhere in discussions of accessibility on the internet: websites can’t be accessibility compliant without sacrificing design, interactivity and general user experience for visitors without disabilities (paying 50% more for designers and coders might help, but would still fall short).
- Those with challenges using traditional or common-place access to the written words on websites require alternative web pages that are made specifically for an audience requiring accessibility.
Yes, the articles on Dopa are meant to be equally useful for everyone; they will not, however, have some of the features we would expect from a highly interactive site like the New York Times.
Our pieces take 2x longer to finish and publish than “crowd-sourced” pieces on sites like Wikipedia, where contributors are already being asked too much on as volunteers. How many writers and editors can add 25% time to their no-pay work-load so they can also learn the proper dos and don’t off accessible web pages? Therein lies the challenge.