RE: [WSG] Flash is more accessible than CSS?

[Web Dandy Design]

It’s really unfortunate that journalists put together articles without all the information or without giving a comprehensive overview of the whole area of accessibility.   The same article was broadcast last night in the UK in the BBC program Click and really gave the impression that:   1.    CSS is a new ‘technology’ which is difficult to learn. 2.    That font size and colours are hard coded into CSS and therefore make it difficult for disabled users to make any changes within their own browser! 3.    That Flash is ‘THE WAY’ to go.   Steve is probably right in saying that Leonie Watson was selectively edited in the interview but it really does do a disservice to the area of accessibility when a journalist broadcasts something like this on the BBC. As many people will see this and assume it’s correct.   The BBC did ask for feedback so it maybe worth trying to give a balanced opinion and correct some of the inaccuracies of the article/broadcast.   Elaine Web Dandy http://www.webdandy.co.uk   -----Original Message----- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 30 October 2006 01:03 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Flash is more accessible than CSS?   I do know Leonie Watson and several of her colleagues at Nomensa personally, and they are highly regarded here in the UK. Leonie was the chairman of the Association of Accessibility Professionals - http://www.accessibilityprofessionals.org, an organisation that promotes accessibility and web standards.   I suspect that whatever she wrote has been selectively edited to support the rest of the article (this has happened to me more than once).   Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk     Mark Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:   > It's a horrible wet Sunday so... > > Christian Montoya wrote: > > > It's a really poor article altogether. > Agreed > > > The writer > Katie Ledger is a *presenter* not a journalist of any depth or note > AFAIK, so that explains the lack of research and understanding. > > > only interviewed *1* person, not an expert, and clearly someone with their > own bias. > To be fair, Leonie Watson is blind herself [1] and seems at least as > well qualified to comment on accessibility as most I've encountered. I > don't know her personally (I live on the other side of the world) but > I'm willing to accept her opinions as valid in her experience. I don't > think you can dismiss her completely. > > > > The > > writer talked about *1* website, a completely unique example which > > took *a lot* of money and work to accomplish. > > That's a key problem with the article - it makes accessibility sound > really hard and something you have to get experts in for. > > > > The writer didn't do her > > research about CSS, and never mentioned section 508, valid HTML or any > > of the other HTML-based accessibility/well-formedness measures. > > Writer != journo, as mentioned earlier. But you can't really knock a > British writer for not mentioning an artificial American "measure" that > only applies to American Government agencies. I agree about the lack of > research though. > > > The > > writer also mentioned *1* court case, and made it seem like only *1* > > person has a problem with Target. That's just not how you write > > articles. Throwing together all this barely related information > > results in an article that is just about useless to the reader. > > Click is a television program. Television is, by nature, superficial. > > My take on the piece (one of about 3 on the site) is that someone at the > BBC said "we really should do something about this accessibility thing. > Who knows anyone?" and from there the trail lead to Nomensa and Watson. > Alex and Tony muttered about agendas and I do suspect that Nomensa has > an agenda to do with Flash - it does appear to be the only technology > mentioned on their site, and a quick search for "CSS" and "Cascading > Style Sheets" turns up nothing. I suspect they put out a press release > or something which someone handed to Ledger. > > I'm not sure what they expect to achieve with that agenda though... > > BTW They did a report [2] into accessibility of UK Central govt sites > which is interesting, although Jan 2005 is an age away now. It's not > downloadable from their website, but you can sneak it out of google ;-) [3]. > > > [1] http://www.nomensa.com/about/key-people/leonie-watson.html > [2] >  http://www.nomensa.com/resources/research/web-accessibility-in-central-government.html > [3] >  http://www.iabf.or.kr/lib/common/download.asp?path=pds&file=Nomensa_Central_Government_Report_Jan_2005.pdf > > > Cheers > > mark > > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ******************************************************************* > >           ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************   ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************