Another “mixed bag” post from us — Is it time to leave Twitter? How can we incentivize journals and authors to take up open science practices? What is “involution” and is DEIA the solution?
A new type of post from us today, offering a smorgasbord of opinions on topics including the ongoing Twitter/Elon Musk saga, just what “equitable access” to the literature means, the ongoing lack of experimental controls in one area of bibliometric analysis, and whether journals are more like a gate or a sewer.
Accessible images deliver an inclusive reading experience and unlock the numerous benefits of data-rich accessible images. This post summarizes a 2022 SSP panel offering practical solutions for ensuring scholarly image collections and in-line graphics are fully accessible to all readers.
Authors need to understand more about producing web documents, particularly accessibility, if they want to forgo traditional publishing.
Justin Alexander from ITHAKA discusses effective ways to continuously ensure that media meets accessibility requirements.
Today’s guest post, by Simon Holt and Erin Osborne-Martin, is the first of two looking at the experiences of people with disabilities in scholarly publishing (the second will be published tomorrow).
Flashy new technologies come and go, but getting back to basics is a reminder that the “killer app” is high-quality content, composed in accordance with established standards for discoverability and accessibility.
Today’s guest post is by Betsy Beaumon CEO of Benetech and keynote at SSP’s annual meeting this year. She shares her passion for technology solutions to accessibility, and for making the scholarly publishing world more inclusive of people with disabilities.
If a picture is worth a thousand words, the folks at textBOX can help publishers present that descriptive text (“alt-text”) to the online world, meeting key accessibility and discoverability demands.
Proposing a model for thinking about the interactions of rigor, cogency, accessibility, significance, openness, and impact in scholarly quality.
Accessible publishing is better for publishers, better for the bottom line, better for readers of all stripes. If we agree that egalitarian dissemination of academic content is the thing to do, including those with physical, learning, or cognitive challenges, then why does end-to-end accessible publishing continue to elude us?
Ideally, we want science and scholarship to be not only available to the general public, but also comprehensible to them. But the challenges to doing so are real, and may vary both by discipline and by study type.
Darrell Gunter discusses the great opportunities available in making all forms of content accessible to everyone.
Charlie Rapple reports back from ISMTE, which does not stand for the International Society of Making Toys Educational
When thinking about open access to content, is it appropriate to equate disabling downloads with lack of support for the visually impaired?