On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:39 AM, David Francis Buhler <davidbuh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Almost all accessibility implementations are failures. If a blind > person cannot understand a single word pronounced, this can be a > show-stopper. > > However, most US companies need to support users with disabilities. A > disability can be cognitive, visual, a hearing problem, etc. The lack > of an accessible framework makes most software a no-go for companies > who must support http://www.ada.gov/ . > > Software needs to support accessibility. > > For example, I believe you'll find a receptionist needs reasonable > accommodation by 'software' in the workplace. Employers accordingly, > need to provide software that provides accommodation: > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990#Employment > http://www.compuaccess.com/ada_guide.htm > +1. We should not drop accessibility. It is not the way to move the Flex framework forward. We should at least attempt to maintain it. That said, I am for creating a performance optimized, non-accessible version of components while still maintaining a non-optimized, accessible set of components. All other functionalities would remain the same and it is upto the users to chose which mode to use. With some clean architecture, I believe we can make the view portions of the components switch between GPU mode and non GPU mode without a lot of effort. If we do it right, this can be a switch that we can add to a component. Om
