If you ignore what they're supposed to mean (in some cases), Unicode has a lot of symbols that could probably be used more in #CLI in place of emoji (which can't be styled)
(Caveat, this probably isn't great for accessibility, so have an option to turn it off)
As a person that uses screen readers, would you prefer that CLIs not use unicode symbols at all or just allow to turn them off using a setting or flag?
They have design / aesthetic/ friendlyness value for sighted people (IMO) but that's not more important than allowing everyone to use the given tool
@yoavlavi I think if you use Unicode symbols for their intended purposes, then screen readers can either present them or filter them out based on users' preferences.
@matt I meant specifically if they're used for visual purposes only (with a different meaning than intended), but using them at all / screen reader compatibility with unicode is a good point.
If a CLI uses a symbol that happens to look like the Ubuntu logo for instance for visualization purposes but allows it to be removed or swapped for text using a config or flag, is that something you'd personally prefer not to be there to begin with or does it not matter as long as you can turn it off?
@matt I'm assuming the same could also be used by people that have a hard time connecting pictographs to meaning
Perhaps
NO_VISUAL - the user does not directly interface with the command line via sight but by other means (like NO_COLOR), do not use signaling or elements that can only be accessed visually
Add comment