Are you… serious? It’s not, it’s just a reporting of it, If you would prefer this version of the same information, here you go. Go nuts, it’s all the same thing. Why are you so hung up on this? Was your whole message really so meaningless to you that you’re willing to abandon it in favor of being sidetracked about this formal grammar bs?
(rewriting ::: spoiler does make a difference to those of us with less user-proof clients, thank you for that!)
You seem hung up: as stated earlier, this renders correctly in standard web browser & clients following standards.
If that markdown should work, then accommodating broken clients doesn’t help pressure fixing them.
Yea but I already clarified that my confusion was with the contents, not the format. I don’t understand what your goal in sending it is because the message is unclear (though I do also appreciate that you’ve edited it).
It’s abundantly clear when rendered correctly: posting an image of text without text alternative results in a multitude of issues we don’t get by simply linking to the source.
Again, the rendering issues were not my problem; I can read markdown well enough that it’s not a true barrier to communication. The issue is that it is by no means clear what your point is. Even knowing that’s what your message was, it’s difficult to gain that information from the text of what you said. It’s poorly structured and lacks a clear thesis. There’s grammatical errors that make it almost impossible to parse. Some of the points seem totally random to include. Etc.
It’s also just… not how a realistic idea of how a meme community works. Seldom do people have the original post to link back to, and posting purely in text is somewhat antithetical to the whole concept (if that was your suggestion, I’m still uncertain about that. What is “text alternative”?).
I really think that if this is important to you, you should go back and heavily rework your template so that it’s clear to the reader what you mean.
Seldom do people have the original post to link back to
I don’t think so: people just seem to take gratuitous screenshots for no great reason when linking or embedding web content has been around for ages.
It’s a waste.
I’m pretty sure they don’t realize the consequences unless pointed out.
The summary needs text alternative should be clear enough.
That you misunderstood when I was quoting you should really be a sign here: I meant what is a text alternative; as in, can you give a more complete example of a text alternative. Just linking back to the source, especially ones that may not still exist like older screengrabs of twitter, is not a complete solution.
Also you seem to think OCR is for some reason a bad solution when afaik its never even been tried broadly on lemmy, and you dismiss both OCR and manual transcription as “bullshit” when both solutions enable all of the accessibility features you’re (I think?) requesting (and they’re also extremely commonly used by members of several-if-not-all of the groups you’re speaking for). The assumption that everyone here is posting OC is also demonstrably just not the case, there’s hundreds of hits for this screenshot alone that have the exact same size, ratio and cropping going back years.
Seriously your heart seems to be in the right place, but maybe you’re a bit blind to the idea that some of the realities you’re basing this on don’t entirely reflect the one we all live in?
Are you… serious? It’s not, it’s just a reporting of it, If you would prefer this version of the same information, here you go. Go nuts, it’s all the same thing. Why are you so hung up on this? Was your whole message really so meaningless to you that you’re willing to abandon it in favor of being sidetracked about this formal grammar bs?
(rewriting
::: spoilerdoes make a difference to those of us with less user-proof clients, thank you for that!)You seem hung up: as stated earlier, this renders correctly in standard web browser & clients following standards. If that markdown should work, then accommodating broken clients doesn’t help pressure fixing them.
Yea but I already clarified that my confusion was with the contents, not the format. I don’t understand what your goal in sending it is because the message is unclear (though I do also appreciate that you’ve edited it).
It’s abundantly clear when rendered correctly: posting an image of text without text alternative results in a multitude of issues we don’t get by simply linking to the source.
Again, the rendering issues were not my problem; I can read markdown well enough that it’s not a true barrier to communication. The issue is that it is by no means clear what your point is. Even knowing that’s what your message was, it’s difficult to gain that information from the text of what you said. It’s poorly structured and lacks a clear thesis. There’s grammatical errors that make it almost impossible to parse. Some of the points seem totally random to include. Etc.
It’s also just… not how a realistic idea of how a meme community works. Seldom do people have the original post to link back to, and posting purely in text is somewhat antithetical to the whole concept (if that was your suggestion, I’m still uncertain about that. What is “text alternative”?).
I really think that if this is important to you, you should go back and heavily rework your template so that it’s clear to the reader what you mean.
I don’t think so: people just seem to take gratuitous screenshots for no great reason when linking or embedding web content has been around for ages. It’s a waste. I’m pretty sure they don’t realize the consequences unless pointed out.
The summary needs text alternative should be clear enough.
That you misunderstood when I was quoting you should really be a sign here: I meant what is a text alternative; as in, can you give a more complete example of a text alternative. Just linking back to the source, especially ones that may not still exist like older screengrabs of twitter, is not a complete solution.
Also you seem to think OCR is for some reason a bad solution when afaik its never even been tried broadly on lemmy, and you dismiss both OCR and manual transcription as “bullshit” when both solutions enable all of the accessibility features you’re (I think?) requesting (and they’re also extremely commonly used by members of several-if-not-all of the groups you’re speaking for). The assumption that everyone here is posting OC is also demonstrably just not the case, there’s hundreds of hits for this screenshot alone that have the exact same size, ratio and cropping going back years.
Seriously your heart seems to be in the right place, but maybe you’re a bit blind to the idea that some of the realities you’re basing this on don’t entirely reflect the one we all live in?