Re: Flash accessibility [Re: Waking the list up (was 'elo ?)]

> I think this is a bit like arguing that sound files should be compatible 
> for deaf viewers.
> 
> Flash is predominantly visual/audio - accessibility for disabled viewers 
> will depend upon how well alternatives (eg voice overs and subtitles) are 
> included in the flash movie.

I agree completely, but from the point of view of designing sites in Flash the fact
that it is only visual (with sound effects) leaves something to be desired. Doing a
site primarily as a sound file doesn't make a lot of sense either.

So flash is good at what it is, but technology that allows similar effect but
through the concept of degradable markup is preferable in my mind. Then the
underlying information can be accessed by a much wider selection of devices, and the
device-specific style modifications enhance it for a given audience.

Of course most of this is well on the theoretical side, because most people aren't
happy with "accessible in all browsers, but looks like web circa 1996 in anything
that doesn't support the newest tech." 

Luke

=====
You did something because it had always been done,
and the explanation was "but we've always done it this way."
A million dead people can't have been wrong, can they? 

      -- (Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/

HWG hwg-theory mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA