Ok, so ChatGPT got some things wrong. If everyone began posting how ChatGPT got something wrong, we will be here all day. I can't see how this article is newsworthy.
And the article has constant literary interruptions like this:
"I set down my teacup and put my face in my hands."
"There was an almost infinitesimal pause before ChatGPT chirped"
"I closed my eyes and contemplated my life choices."
"I narrowed my eyes as ChatGPT brightly informed me"
I don't know what the author is trying here but there is a time and place to use literary pauses like these and I don't think, this article is that place. The article reads like a weird cross between a rant, technical article and a wannabe literary piece.
There are so many better and higher quality submissions in the /newest that never make it to the front page but it's almost always some shallow generic "hobbyist" junk with zero value like this that makes it instead.
Making a rocket science of a <button> on an HTML page... "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity"... yeah.
Honestly I'm just relieved that ChatGPT didn't suggest a div with role="button".
I have spent the last 5 years trying to get a good grasp of semantic and accessible HTML. It seems like every week I find out I was wrong about something I thought I knew. There's a bunch of blog posts out there with conflicting examples, and the only "official" source that's actually readable is the ARIA Practices Guide (APG). Which, by the way, starts off by telling you that "No ARIA is better than Bad ARIA" and recommends that you don’t use any of the code from the "Patterns" pages because reasons.
So to end my rant, I would say that on the one hand, I understand the author's frustration, but on the other, a11y in HTML is a nebulous maze of ARIA attributes and it isn't always clear which element is the "semantic" one for certain use cases.
The author could have easily written the same article with vague personal opinions of how their own code isn't perfect for a slightly different set of default assumptions of how buttons should be used. Not everyone wants to dive into <form> behavior oddities like changing element's default behaviors or automatically reloading the page on submission nor do they want to assume the best label in the graphical context always matches the best label in the screen reader context. Doesn't make their example actually bad, it just means short examples are always easy to nit about.
One thing I liked about the article is it's a longer dive instead of a short answer, meaning you get more of the nuance presented to you instead of assumed. Of course, it looks like the same thing comes from either source if you set out to ask for a detailed explanation.
Also, FWIW since these will all vary anyways, I do actually like the full answer I got from ChatGPT more overall than the one at the end of their article. Even despite that it doesn't bother mentioning form considerations it gives more full answers to the points in the "hand tailored" response, as well as covering when you should consider using a separate aria-label or not https://chatgpt.com/share/e/6754aaad-823c-8010-a5ad-96eff5f0....
eminent101 ·19 days ago
And the article has constant literary interruptions like this:
"I set down my teacup and put my face in my hands."
"There was an almost infinitesimal pause before ChatGPT chirped"
"I closed my eyes and contemplated my life choices."
"I narrowed my eyes as ChatGPT brightly informed me"
I don't know what the author is trying here but there is a time and place to use literary pauses like these and I don't think, this article is that place. The article reads like a weird cross between a rant, technical article and a wannabe literary piece.
Show replies
juxtapret ·19 days ago
There are so many better and higher quality submissions in the /newest that never make it to the front page but it's almost always some shallow generic "hobbyist" junk with zero value like this that makes it instead.
Making a rocket science of a <button> on an HTML page... "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity"... yeah.
Show replies
codelikeawolf ·19 days ago
I have spent the last 5 years trying to get a good grasp of semantic and accessible HTML. It seems like every week I find out I was wrong about something I thought I knew. There's a bunch of blog posts out there with conflicting examples, and the only "official" source that's actually readable is the ARIA Practices Guide (APG). Which, by the way, starts off by telling you that "No ARIA is better than Bad ARIA" and recommends that you don’t use any of the code from the "Patterns" pages because reasons.
So to end my rant, I would say that on the one hand, I understand the author's frustration, but on the other, a11y in HTML is a nebulous maze of ARIA attributes and it isn't always clear which element is the "semantic" one for certain use cases.
zamadatix ·18 days ago
One thing I liked about the article is it's a longer dive instead of a short answer, meaning you get more of the nuance presented to you instead of assumed. Of course, it looks like the same thing comes from either source if you set out to ask for a detailed explanation.
Also, FWIW since these will all vary anyways, I do actually like the full answer I got from ChatGPT more overall than the one at the end of their article. Even despite that it doesn't bother mentioning form considerations it gives more full answers to the points in the "hand tailored" response, as well as covering when you should consider using a separate aria-label or not https://chatgpt.com/share/e/6754aaad-823c-8010-a5ad-96eff5f0....
smusamashah ·19 days ago