►
From YouTube: UX Foundations Team Conversation About Accessibility and Inclusive Design with Derek Featherstone
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
A
A
Well,
yeah
I
was
gonna
ask
I
think
you
said
you
had
some.
There
were
some
questions
that
got
kind
of
passed
around,
and
I
mean
I
just
love
to
even
just
talk
more
about
about
pajamas
and
other
things
that
you're
doing
there
and,
and
you
know
what
you're,
what
you're
working
on
in
terms
of
accessibility
within
the
design
system
and
and
that
kind
of
thing.
So
I'd
love
to
just
know
more
and
and
even
answer
some
of
those
questions
directly
from
the
doc.
B
Sure
yeah
we
can,
we
can
cover
the
doc
there
weren't
a
whole
lot
of
questions
there
about
five.
One
of
the
themes
that
really
came
up
was
around
presonus
personas
for
accessibility,
and
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
speak
a
little
bit
to
how
has
what
has
the
effect
been
like
when
you
introduce
those
personas
for
access
needs
and
and
if
we
were
to
do
that,
what
would
you
recommend
how
we
approach
it.
A
So
experiences
is
mixed:
the
value
of
a
persona
is
partly
in
the
end
result,
but
I
think
the
bigger
value
of
a
persona
is
the
work
that
goes
into
creating
them
and
the
research
that
you
do
to
to
make
that
happen.
So
what
we
find
is
people
tend
to
look
at
at
accessibility
personas
in
like
two
different
ways:
one
is
they
create
an
accessibility
persona
which
is
like
here's
dave,
the
guy,
that's
in
the
wheelchair,
and
they
focus
on
that
they
don't
focus
on.
A
You
know
we
when
we
don't,
so
we
see
a
lot
of
things
where
the
the
focus
with
personas
is
on
the
disability
and
that
actually,
partly
I
don't
know,
I
want
to
say
that
it
doesn't
usually
go
towards
creating
the
culture
that
you're
actually
after
what
it.
What
it
tends
to
do
is
create
a
you
know.
This
is
dave
who's
in
a
wheelchair.
A
C
Yeah,
I
think
that's
I
feel,
like
you
summarized
all
of
my
thoughts
on
accessibility.
Personas
really
well,
because
we've
been
getting
a
lot
of
questions
as
we've
been
kind
of
doing
more
education,
around
accessibility
and
like
oh
well,
we
have
these
personas
like
do.
We
need
to
create
accessibility,
personas
and
it's
been
like.
Well,
we
have
these
personas
that
we
did
a
lot
of
research
around
and
it
doesn't
quite
feel
right
to
just
create
separate
personas.
It
also
doesn't
feel
right
to
just
add
you
know
things
to
our
existing
personas.
So.
C
A
The
to
me,
anyway,
I
think
one
of
the
interesting
things
that
that
happens
is
people.
Think
exactly
like
that.
Like
oh,
do
we
need
some
accessibility,
personas,
you,
you
don't
really
right,
like
every
single
problem,
that
a
person
with
a
disability
is
trying
to
solve
the
things
that
go
behind
their
motivations,
their
behaviors
and
the
things
that
they're
doing
those
are
about
the
tasks
and
the
things
that
they're
trying
to
achieve.
It
has
nothing
to
do
with
their
disability.
They
just
happen
to
use
a
different
set
of
tools.
Maybe
to
make
that
happen.
A
You
know
two
or
three
times
as
far
to
get
to
a
place
where
the
ramp
or
the,
where
the
curb
cut
to
get
up
to
like
street
to
the
door
level
is
right
in
front
of
the
door
versus
you
know:
350
feet
around
the
side.
Those
those
kinds
of
things
have
an
impact
on
how
people
make
their
decisions
and
those
those
are
interesting.
A
Because
then,
instead
of
having
a
list
of
healthcare
providers
and
then
being
able
to
to
drill
down
onto
the
details
page
and
see
what
the
physical
accessibility
characteristics
are
of
that
building,
if
we
know
that
people
use
that
to
make
decisions,
we
might
actually
put
that
on
the
results
page.
So
they
don't
have
to
dive
in
dive
back
out
dive
in
dive
out
to
find
one
to
find
a
location
where
the
ramp
is
right
at
the
front.
A
So
knowing
the
way
that
that
people
with
certain
types
of
disabilities
might
actually
approach
a
problem
and
how
they're
different
those
are,
the
kinds
of
things
that
I
think
we
should
should
probably
focus
on
through.
You
know,
through
more
inclusive
design,
research
and
methodologies,
so
sometimes
yeah.
We
totally
should
dive
into
that.
A
A
You
know
that
maybe
the
way
that
they
manage
something
within
get
lab
is
way
different
because
they
they
have
chronic
pain
and
therefore
they
have
to
match
their
tasks
differently,
and
so
they
approach
a
workflow
differently
simply
because
they
have,
you
know
chronic
pain.
So
those
are
the
the
kinds
of
things
that
we
probably
want
to
try
and
figure
out,
because
that
will
will
give
us
much
more
richness
in
in
the
way
that
we
approach
solving
those
problems.
C
A
A
That
is
not
a
coveted
cough,
but
I
have
had
like
a
seven
year,
chronic
cough
that
I'm
I'm
starting
the
process
of
getting
it
figured
out
it
sneaks
up
on
me
at
times,
and
we
don't
know
what
it
is,
but
we're
gonna
we're
gonna
figure
it
out.
Even
even
things
like,
I
think,
jeremy,
you
were
saying
something
about
iconography
and
you
know
the
iconography
that
we
use.
A
One
of
the
things
that
we've
found
in
usability
studies
in
the
past
is
that
iconography
can
have
a
significant
impact
on
people
with
low
vision,
which
you
know
seems
really
obvious
to
say,
but
but
that's
the
kind
of
thing
where
we
can
get
that
feedback
way
before
we're
ever
in
like
high
fidelity
mockup,
we
can.
We
can
do
that,
like
hey
we're
coming
up
with
a
new
icon
system.
We
want
to
work
through
this
and
make
sure
that
these
icons
make
sense.
A
So
you
know
we're
looking
at
the
the
colors
on
the
icons,
the
size
of
the
icons,
the
the
markings
on
them.
How
easy
are
they
to
distinguish
from
one
another
and
again,
that's
all
stuff
that
you
would
you
would
expect,
but
we
do
it
specifically
with
people
with
low
vision,
because
we
know
that
somebody
with
low
vision
has
sometimes
difficulties
distinguishing
one
icon
from
another.
That
color
is
an
issue
and
that
that
size
has
an
impact
that
we
did
a.
A
So
what
we
saw
happen
was
people
with
low
vision
were
actually
confusing
it
because
it
wasn't
recognizable
as
an
icon,
because
it
didn't
have
the
same
shape
as
everything
else
that
they
had
learned
and
the
the
weight
of
the
icon
was
so
thin
that
the
the
bicycle
looked
like
an
o,
a
v
and
an
o,
and
they
couldn't
figure
out
what
ovo
meant
and
they're
like
they
were.
They
were
confusing
them
with
letter
forms
I'm
like
wow.
I
wish
we
had
found
that
out
like
three
months
ago.
A
I
did
a
thing
last
year
where
I
I
was
asking
people
questions.
I
have
all
these
ideas
like
here's,
how?
I
think
I
would
like
you
as
people
with
different
disabilities,
to
contribute
to
this
project,
and
I
realized
pretty
quickly
that
that,
if
I'm
going
to
include
them
as
co-creators
before,
I
tell
them
how
I
want
to
include
them.
A
We
do
the
work
you
kind
of
get
into
these
habits
of
doing
the
work
in
a
certain
way.
So
so
asking
for
that
perspective,
I
think
is
is
is,
is
a
useful
part
of
it
right
and
how
do
we
take
this
and
and
actually
find
a
way
to
have
participation
all
the
way
through,
rather
than
just
at
the
end?
When
we're
you
know,
testing.
B
I
think
my
question
is
kind
of
a
segway
to
that,
where
you
know,
rather
than
having
a
separate
accessibility
inquiry
or
research
track
to
have
a
more
inclusive
research,
recruiting
process
where,
when
we
have
an
idea,
you
know
for
a
design
and
we're
in
solution,
validation,
phase
to
make
sure
that
we
have
somebody
with
access
needs
in
that
pool.
And
then,
as
I'm
talking,
I
realize
I
don't
think
we
ask
that
question
in
any
of
our
participant
pool.
You
know
qualification
surveys.
I
think
we'll
ask
things
like.
A
Would
I
would
say
you
you
it's
very
likely
that
you
don't
have
many
or
any,
because
you
tend
not
to
to
have
people
that
you
know
not
that
it's
impossible,
but
you
tend
not
to
unless
you're
specifically
recruiting
for
it.
Ideally
I
I
have.
I
have,
as
you
can
imagine.
I
have
opinions
about
this.
I
think
there's
two
ways
that
you
can
go
about
it.
One
is
we're
we're
looking
to
establish
an
end
state
where,
in
every
kind
of
end,
validation
run
that
we're
doing.
A
You
know
you
can
you
can
figure
out
what
that
what
that
number
is,
ideally
the
way
that
I've
always
looked
at
it
is
accessibility
should
be
part
of
everything,
so
we're
going
to
incorporate
people
with
disabilities
into
whatever
other
research
studies
you're
doing,
but
I
also
believe
that
accessibility
needs
some
dedicated
time
and
space
to
be
its
own
thing,
and
so
you
know
when
we're
when
we're
talking
with.
I
built
this.
A
This
is
literally
perfect
timing
because
I
just
finished
this
talk
when
when
I
you
know
when
we're
talking
with
teams
about
how
to
do
work,
I
often
tell
them:
yes,
accessibility
belongs
in
every
sprint.
It's
part
of
every
feature,
it's
part
of
everything,
but
once
a
quarter
we
should
plan
for
and
do
an
accessibility,
specific
sprint
that
brings
attention
to
it.
A
So
I
like
to
think
of
it
as
yes,
it
should
be
part
of
everything,
but
yes,
it
should
also
be
its
own
thing,
and
so,
if
you're
thinking
about
that
from
a
research
perspective,
you
could
do
almost
exactly
the
same
thing.
We
have
people
with
disabilities
that
are
that
are
incorporated
into
everything
into
all
the
studies,
but
we
also
have
some
accessibility,
specific
ones
that
happen
with
people
that
are
that
are
only
people
with
disabilities.
A
So
that's
one
of
my
opinions
on
it.
My
second
opinion
on
it
is
there
was
a
time
when
we
were
doing
a
lot
of,
and
I'm
saying
this
like
this
is
my
company
from
like
2007
2008.
We
were
doing
this
work,
we
were
contracted
with
a
client
and
we
were
doing
usability
studies
both
with
and
without
people
with
disabilities.
A
On
the
same
things
and
every
time
I
say
every
time,
I
shouldn't
blanket
it
quite
like
that,
but
almost
every
time
the
people
with
disabilities
found
the
exact
same
usability
issues
that
people
without
disabilities
found,
but
they
found
them
faster.
They
were
more
prominent,
they
were,
it
was
like.
It
was
really
really
clear
and
really
obvious
that,
yes,
these
were
usability
issues
that
are
going
to
impact
everybody,
but
people
with
disabilities
found
them
quicker
and
they
were
so
much
more
obvious.
A
So
my
other
opinion
on
it
is
we
should
only
do
those
kind
of
you
know.
Studies
and
and
do
that
research
only
with
people
with
disabilities,
because
we
we
don't
necessarily
you
know
if
we're
going
to
find
all
the
same
usability
issues
anyway,
then
part
of
me
wants
to
dig
into
that
and
say
what
would
it
be
like
if
we
only
did
that,
because
that
would
be
like
different
than
anybody
has
ever
approached
it.
A
So
that's
my
second
opinion
on.
I
don't
know
which
one
which
one
I
like
the
most,
but
they
they.
You
know.
I
think
they
they
take
top
of
mind
for
me,
depending
on
on
who
I'm
talking
to
and
who's
kind
of
willing
to
willing
to
listen
and
what
they
what
they
want
to
do,
how
they
want
to
approach
it.
So.
D
C
D
Accessibility,
testers,
if
you're
familiar
with
them,
but
the
results
and
the
way
that
their
testers
could
communicate.
The
fixes
were
so
much
more
helpful
than
I
think
anybody
else
could
ever
communicate
it
both
in
the
lack
of
subjectivity,
but
also
the
clarity
and
how
it
was
found.
The
test
case
everything
around
it
was
so
clear
and
and
so
much
more
helpful.
So
I
I
do.
I
do
like
like
your
thoughts
there.
That's
that's
very
interesting
to
mike
to
your
point.
Oh
oh!
Go
ahead.
D
I
was
going
to
say
one
of
the
things
that
we've
had
difficulty
with
is
just
around
people
opting
in
to
say.
Yes,
I
have
some
kind
of
an
access
need
for
legal
implications,
or
we
initially
looked
at.
Can
we
have
it
even
an
internal
database
of
our
own
team
members
that
opt
in
that
they
could
say
hey.
I
can
help
with
color
plan
testing,
but
legal
was
like.
D
We
really
can't
do
that
because
of
hipaa
and
other
things
of
having
that
documented,
and
we
use
you
know,
tools
like
user
testing
and
they
actually
don't
include
any
kind
of
a
category
for
their
for
their
testers.
To
to
you
know
include
that
hey
I
can
test
these
types
of
scenarios
or
or
disabilities,
so
it
has
been
a
challenge
in
that
regard.
Finding
key
advocates
that
we
can
bring
along
the
way
on
a
project
from
start
to
finish
at
get
lab,
and
you
know
in
any
effort
really.
A
A
A
You
know
some
some
self-selection
biases
to
it
for
sure,
but
we
also
do
a
lot
of
work
where
we've
done
this,
for
I
don't
know,
probably
15
years
this
approach,
almost
every
national
advocacy
group
has
local
chapters
in
places,
so
we
stay
in
contact
with
them
and
and
talk
with
them
pretty
regularly.
When
excuse
me,
when
we
can
and
we
get
them
to
help
with
recruiting
that
way,
they're
sending
us
people,
we
can
decide,
you
know,
does
this
person
fit
the
profile
of
what
this
client
is
after
etc?
A
So
there's
there's
definitely
ways
you
know
ways
around
it,
the
other.
You
know
the
other
stuff.
With
with
personal
information
in
general.
Is
you
know,
and
not?
This
is
not
definitive.
This
is
not
legal
advice.
This
is
you
know
nothing
of
the
sort,
but
yes
you're
part
of
it.
You've
answered
these
questions,
but
you
can
tell
us
at
any
time
that
you
want
to
not
be
part
of
this
anymore.
You,
you
know,
there's
no
obligation
to
stay
in,
there's
no
obligation
to
participate.
A
A
So
those
those
things
you
know
are
all
ways
to
to
make
it
happen,
and
you
obviously
need
to
to
talk
with
legal
about
it
and
and
and
hr
to
make
sure
that
they're
all
on
board
with
it,
but
usually
it's
about
whether
or
not
you're
saving
that
data
and
that
data
can
be
used
in
a
way.
That's
discriminatory
against
that
person
right.
So
it's
it's
a
little
bit.
It's
a
little
bit
tricky.
A
D
Oh
really
helpful.
We
we
do
have
like
our
gitlab
first
look,
which
is
our
kind
of
opt-in
program
that
we
do
with
customers.
I
believe
you
know,
there's
compensation
and
things
that
are
formalized
with
that
which
is
good,
and
so
I
think
I've
looked
into
it
before,
but
now
that
I'm
you
know
hearing
what
you're
saying.
I
think
that
there
could
be
some
opportunity
to
go
back
and
maybe
make
some
of
those
things
open-ended.
D
A
C
B
Ask
you
questions
all
day,
long
yeah.
There
was
one
one
more
just
one
more
question
I
wanted
to
squeak
in
and
that
that
is
about
common
mental
disorders.
I
remember
in
your
course
you
mentioned.
There
was
a
persona
that
I
think
kind
of
lumped
in
autism
and
anxiety
into
one
persona,
and
so
I'm
wondering
what
are
some
considerations
you
have
around
those
type
of
like
mental
disorders.
A
Yeah
this
is
the
the
least
the
least
well
understood.
Area
of
accessibility
is
anything
on
the
cognitive
side,
the
neurodiversity
side
and
just
overall
brain
function.
The
things
tend
to
get
grouped
into
categories,
whether
it's
you
know,
anxiety,
related
memory,
related
literacy,
related
numeracy
related.
You
know
the
all
all
of
those
things
kind
of
you
know,
they're,
all
kind
of
functional
and
and
the
way
that
I
tend
to
look
at
it
and
maybe
is
even
different
than
I
did.
You
know
back
when
I
created
the
courses.
A
A
That
makes
makes
no
difference
that
he's
got
that
as
a
result
of
a
traumatic
brain
injury
or
some
other
thing
that
happened
or
some
other
you
know,
other
type
of
disability.
The
the
functional
impact
is
that
he
has
short-term
memory
related
issues.
You
know
the
fact
that
he's
got
some
visual
processing
related
issues
because
of
the
you
know,
the
connection
between
the
left
side
and
the
right
side
of
his
brain
and
the
way
that
he
sees
things
that
has
very
little
to
do
with
the
actual
thing
that
caused
it.
A
We
just
know
that
he
has
some
visual
processing
things,
so
I
I
tend
to
when
we're
doing
this
think
of
what
the
what
the
the
functional
impact
is.
More
than
the
actual
you
know
the
the
actual
condition
or
diagnosis
or
or
whatever
it
is,
and
I'll
truthfully
say
this
too,
when
I
put
those
personas
in
the
course
I
was
like.
A
The
the
value
in
them
is
that
they
illustrate
that
those
those
are
pretend
people
that
are
culled
from
you
know
that
I've
collected
from
years
and
years
of
of
doing
that
work
with
people.
So
there
are
kind
of
you
know,
conglomerates
of
of
some
sort
and
in
the
absence
of
actually
having
something
else
to
anchor
to
these,
you
know
these
help.
So
so
I
don't
know
if
I
actually
answered
your
question
or
if
I
avoided
it.
B
B
This
is
kind
of
more
of
a
case
to
like
follow
those
and
yeah.
I
really
really
appreciate
what
you
said
too
about
the
personas.
I
agree
they
can.
They
can
be
a
distraction
and,
like
any
other
method,
they're
applicable
at
a
certain
time,
so
maybe
in
an
organization's
early
stages
of
adoption
of
accessibility
and
the
awareness
of
accessibility
that
personas
might
be
a
tool,
but
I
could
also
imagine
that
you
wouldn't
really
need
personas
to
make
progress
on
improving
accessibility.
B
I
think
the
thing
that
you
mentioned
about
having
accessibility,
improvements,
every
iteration
or
every
sprint
and
then
having
a
sprint
every
quarter,
where
accessibility
is
a
focus
that
can
have
an
impact
and
you
don't
have
to
have
personas
to
to
pursue
those
improvements
right
yeah.
I
really
appreciate
you
humoring
me
on
that
question
and
and
yeah
to
take
it
back
to
tori's
point
we'd
love
to
answer
your
questions
about
how
we're
approaching
accessibility
in
pajamas.
Our
design
system.
A
Yeah
one
of
the
one
of
the
questions
that
I
had
well,
I
guess
was:
I
was
trying
to
figure
out
where,
where
you
are
on
the
journey
like
I
don't
know
how
long
pajamas
has
been
around
and
and
where
you
are
on
the
journey
right
now.
I
I
remember
looking
at
it
thinking
about
it
and
just
kind
of
wondering
how
accessibility
fits
into
it.
I
know,
there's
you
know,
there's
components
that
are
accessible.
A
I
didn't
see
a
ton
of.
I
don't
think.
Anyway,
I've
looked
at
a
lot
of
design
systems
in
the
last
three
weeks,
while
I've
been
putting
this
this
talk
together,
so
I
don't
recall,
seeing
a
whole
lot
of
accessibility,
specific
documentation,
and
so
that
was
that's
and
that's
one
of
the
things
that
I've
spent
quite
a
bit
of
time
on
with
with
different
organizations,
is
the
documentation
side.
So
I
wanted
to
dig
in
a
little
to
that
just
to
get
maybe
some
of
the
history
of
of
the
design
system.
C
C
We
started
introducing
audit
guides,
which
jeremy
you
can
certainly
take
over
and
talk
about
that
and
then
also
trying
to
like
shift
accessibility
left
and
put
it
more
in
our
processes
from
the
beginning
and
then
we're
kind
of
working
on.
How
do
we
document
that
process
and
ensure
that
designers
are
thinking
about
it
throughout
the
whole
process
and
not
just
like
a
checklist
at
the
end,
when
a
component.
D
I
think
that's
that's
correct
one
of
our
tenants,
I
think
of
once.
We
found
that
founded
kind
of
the
foundations
team
was
a
like
the
style
side
of
things,
and
obviously
that
you
know
the
visual
layer
was
was
kind
of
a
lot
of
low-hanging
fruit
and
then
trying
to
complement
it.
A
few
ways
where
we're
doing
the
education
piece
and
and
more
awareness
internally
to
to
kind
of
champion
some
of
these
things
from
accessibility.
D
We've
also
done
more
global
items
from
a
design
system
standpoint
where
we've
addressed
color
and
things
like
that
that
might
bleed
into
other
elements
and
and
start
to
bring
up
their
level
of
accessibility
and
we've
created
kind
of
a
status
and
a
formula
or
a
pattern.
I
should
say
to
excuse
me
to
audit
our
components
now
and
that's
what
we've
really
begun
to
shift
our
weight
towards
is
auditing
them
and
having
kind
of
a
rigor
around.
D
How
do
we
do
both
manual
and
automated
and
validate
and
then
from
those
results
that
they're
currently
kind
of
at
the
at
the
beginning
stages
we'll
be
able
to
go
back
into
pajamas
and
document
those
for
each
component
and
say
you
know
when
you're
using
this?
This
is
the
expectation
like
this
is
what
should
happen.
This
is
the
behavior.
This
is
the
results
you
should
expect.
If
it
doesn't,
here's
how
you
troubleshoot
we're
also
doing
some
things
like
creating
guides.
D
The
only
one
we
have
today
is
is
like
a
keyboarding
guide
where
somebody
that's
maybe
new
to
auditing,
could
go
through
and
be
like.
Okay.
How
would
I
even
test
or
look
at
something
from
a
keyboard
perspective,
upping
our
best
practices
so
that
we
can
say
okay,
if
you're
using
items
like
toast
messages
or
alerts?
D
What's
the
best
practice
on
how
to
communicate
that
content
to
a
user,
and
so
we're
kind
of
shaping
it
in
a
few
different
ways
and
and
then
to
jarek's
point
earlier
going
into,
like
our
view,
components
and
making
sure
that
at
the
start,
everything
is
there
it's
enough
to
build
these
out
in
accessible
ways.
So
that
we're
using
some
correct
semantics
to
begin
with
we're
using
you
know
aria
where
it's
needed,
etc.
So
yeah.
A
E
Yeah
and
to
talk
about
your
earlier
point
about
you
know,
once
we
haven't
really
productized
this
design
system.
As
you
see,
you
know,
if
you're
getting
up
and
started
with
a
project,
you
look
at
open
source,
ui
kits
for
different
frameworks
and
things,
and
so
we've
really
been
focused
on
using
this
internally
and
documenting
this.
For
the
internal
get
lab
team
and,
of
course,
it's
open
source.
Anybody
can
use
it,
but
it's
not
like
you
go
to
some
of
these
design
systems.
D
E
Definitely
early
stages,
but
I
like
that
we're
doing
this
now
and
I
did
have
one
question,
because
there's
only
a
few
minutes
left,
I've
been
coming
across
a
lot
of
like
con
conflictions
in
my
head
around
like
an
accessibility,
back
door
or
side
door
feature
or
something
in
settings
that
basically
enhances
accessibility
or
contrast.
Or
what
have
you?
What
are
your
thoughts
around
like
accessible
out
of
the
box?
And
you
know
what
are
your
thoughts
on
this
sort
of
going
into
settings
and
increasing
accessibility?
E
E
A
Without
so
I
would
say
out
of
the
box
accessible,
there
is
a
big
wave
of
it
used
to
be
called
something
else.
It
used
to
be
called
ccpp,
which
was
composite
capabilities
and
personal
preferences,
or
something
and
there's
a
new
acronym
for
it
now,
but
the
the
concept
is,
you
know,
we're
getting
to
a
point
where
lots
of
of
lots
of
the
things
that
fit
in
the
cognitive
realm
of
the
neurodiversity
realm
are
things
that
are
really
hard
to
take
into
account
with
a
here's.
A
A
We
we
have
the
ability
now
to
do
things
like
prefers
reduced
motion
right.
Those
are
the
kind
of
preferences
you
know
prefers.
Reduced
motion
prefers.
You
know
a
particular
contrast
or
prefers
a
predict,
a
particular
color
scheme.
Things
like
that
sensible
and
and
good
design
around
those
kinds
of
preferences
are
going
to
continue
to
happen.
What
we
don't
have
yet
are
like.
I
don't
know
if
you
how
much
you
use
gmail,
but
I
think
you
guys
are
on
on
google
suite
stuff,
so
you
can
for
email.
A
A
That
kind
of
that
kind
of
work
is
going
to
continue
as
we
go
down
the
path
of
personalization
and
preferences
when
it
comes
to
things
like
target
size
and
you
know,
touch
target
size.
Ideally,
we
should
set
a
really
good
default
and
be
in
a
position
where,
by
default,
we're
still
meeting
that,
but
we've
actually
got
other
things
that
we
do
that
allow
for
somebody
to
have
way
bigger
buttons.
I'll,
send
you
an
example.
A
If
you
one
of
the
things
that
I
created
ages
ago,
was
it's
on
examples.simplyaccessible.com
and
there's
a
growing
button
on
there,
so
that,
if
you
actually,
you
know
the
idea
behind
it
was
some
people
miss
a
target
not
because
they
can't
hit
the
target,
but
because
they
have
a
a
tremor
or
a
shake,
and
so
they
might
actually
miss
the
target
accidentally.
Even
though
they're
within,
like
you,
know,
x,
number
of
pixels
of
space,
and
so
we
created
a
button,
we've
never
tested
it
in
production
and
you'll
you'll.
A
When
do
we
assume
intent,
and
you
know
how
many
times
does
somebody
try
to
click
on
a
button
before
we
grow
the
button
and
then,
if
we
grew
the
button
and
they
were
finally
successful
shouldn't,
we
present
that
button
to
them
in
the
same
size
the
next
time.
So
there's
there's
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
that
work.
That's
kind
of
going
on
and
that's
going
to
be
a
big
area
for
growth
in
the
next.
A
C
A
Yeah,
it's
the
it's
an
event
apart
online
summit,
the
spring
or
their
their
spring
summit,
and
that's
in
like
three
three
weeks.
Maybe
so,
if
it's
it's
I
mean
it
is
a
paid
thing.
I
don't
know
if
they're
going
to
release
the
videos
after,
but
if
you
do
want
to,
if
you
want
to
go
to
that
and
check
it
out,
I
mean
you.
Can
it's
like
three,
two
or
three
days
of
stuff
like
there's
a
million
things
there,
it's
ridiculous,
but
if
you
want,
I
have
like
a
a
discount
code
as
well.