Custom website development services
in Dubai

People of determination is the term used across the UAE for people with disabilities. That covers a wide range of needs. A bilingual Arabic and English site reaches that audience only when both languages receive equal attention during development. Not when Arabic gets added afterward to a design built first in English.

The starting point is technical and easy to skip. Every page, and every section written in a different language from the rest, needs its own lang attribute. Arabic text needs the dir attribute set to right to left. Skipping this affects more than layout. Assistive technology reads a page differently once it knows, correctly, which language and which direction a block of text is written in. It reads the text aloud incorrectly when that information is missing or wrong.

Arabic is normally written and typed without the small marks, called diacritics, that show short vowels. A native reader fills those in from context without noticing. A screen reader does not have that context in the same way. It reads letters only. Unmarked Arabic text can be read aloud with the wrong vowel sounds, turning a word into something else entirely. Testing how a page actually sounds through a screen reader, rather than assuming Arabic script alone is enough, catches this early.

Arabic letterforms connect to each other and change shape depending on where a letter sits in a word. Several joined characters can look identical to unrelated ones at a small size. Size matters here. A font chosen for a clean look at a large heading size can turn into a blur of connected strokes in a caption or a footer line. Check body text and captions at the smallest size the design allows. Check again after zooming the page in. That shows whether the chosen Arabic font still reads clearly at that size.

Video content raises the same question in a different form. A promotional or explainer video in Arabic needs captions written in Arabic, not a transliteration into Latin letters. It also needs a full transcript for anyone who prefers or needs text over audio. Both matter equally. Automated caption tools built for Arabic remain uneven. A caption file worth publishing is usually checked, and often corrected, by a fluent reader before it goes live rather than trusted straight out of the tool.

None of this is one-sided. An English page built for the same audience needs its own review. Clear heading structure. Visible focus states for anyone navigating by keyboard. Text that does not rely on color alone to carry meaning. Building the Arabic and English versions from the same checklist, rather than treating English as the default and Arabic as the exception, keeps both languages to the same standard.

The additional testing time is worth it. A site that reads cleanly in English and stumbles in Arabic works, for a bilingual audience, at only half its actual capacity. That gap shows up in complaints long before it shows up in analytics.

A website that loaded quickly at launch often slows down for a reason that has nothing to do with the code the development team wrote. Marketing adds a chat widget. Sales adds a scheduling tool. Someone adds a second analytics platform because the first one does not answer a particular question. None of it is unreasonable. Each script arrives with good intentions and a real cost.

Every third-party script blocks something while it loads, even when it stays invisible on the page. A chat widget that appears at the bottom corner can still delay the moment a visitor can click anything else. That happens because the browser stays busy fetching and running code for a feature most visitors never open. The delay adds up. Multiplied across five or six tools, it becomes noticeable even on a fast connection.

A tag manager helps, but only if someone treats it as something to maintain. Not a place where scripts go once and stay forever. Nothing gets removed on its own. Left unmanaged, a tag manager account accumulates old pixels for campaigns that ended a year ago, duplicate analytics snippets nobody remembers adding twice, and scripts nobody can identify by name anymore. Auditing that list on a fixed schedule, and removing anything without a clear owner, keeps the count from creeping upward indefinitely.

Loading strategy matters as much as the count. Scripts that do not need to run before the page becomes usable should load with the async or defer attribute. Not by blocking the rest of the page while they download and run. Order matters too. A script tag placed carelessly near the top of a page can hold up everything below it, even a script that only needs to fire minutes after the page opens.

Not every request for a new tool needs an outright refusal. Most are reasonable. It should get a real answer before installation, though, rather than after a page speed report comes back worse. A short checklist covering what the tool measures, whether it duplicates something already installed, and how it should load answers most requests in a few minutes. It also stops the slow accumulation before it starts.

Removing a script that nobody remembers approving carries less risk than adding one. Risk stays low either way. Watching a staging version of the page, or a short test, after the removal is usually enough to confirm nothing depended on it. A site that reviews its own script list twice a year rarely needs a dramatic cleanup. Nothing gets old enough to become invisible first.