It gets thornier when it comes to personal things like names and gender. If you tell a group of people that their identity isn't supported by your system, some people will accept that and work around it, some people will be mad at you, and you'll just have to accept that the latter have a good point. You have to stop developing it at some point, so all you can do is try to cover as many people as possible.
That’s a pretty big if, which itself reveals a bias. While it’s certainly not going to cover every single identity, the following will likely cover vastly more than added effort:
1. Do you need to ask for the data at all?
2. If 1, do you need to require the data?
3. If 1, unless you have to comply with arbitrary external requirements (eg law), use a free form text field.
4. Test that the text field and accompanying information is accessible to assistive tools. This usually comes for free if you use built in tools.
5. If not 2, affirmatively indicate that entering anything is optional.
6. Ask for feedback on how you can do it better, again making this obviously optional. If the feedback is meaningful (i.e. “I cannot use this”, rather than “I would prefer this be less inclusive”), accommodate it.
Comments
That’s a pretty big if, which itself reveals a bias. While it’s certainly not going to cover every single identity, the following will likely cover vastly more than added effort:
1. Do you need to ask for the data at all?
2. If 1, do you need to require the data?
3. If 1, unless you have to comply with arbitrary external requirements (eg law), use a free form text field.
4. Test that the text field and accompanying information is accessible to assistive tools. This usually comes for free if you use built in tools.
5. If not 2, affirmatively indicate that entering anything is optional.
6. Ask for feedback on how you can do it better, again making this obviously optional. If the feedback is meaningful (i.e. “I cannot use this”, rather than “I would prefer this be less inclusive”), accommodate it.