Milosz A. Lodowski - New Media Designer wrote:
Christian in your opinion - those sites are inaccessible... without
any argues
I cannot agree so that's why I've asked...
Accessibility is making a site available and usable to the widest
possible audience, on as many user agents as possible. A lot of the
sites you've picked are pure flash, while these can be made somewhat
accessible (e.g. making the text selectable and perhaps some text
resizing options, not playing loud music as soon as I open the site, I
don't really know much more about making flash accessible...) the point
is these sites will never be as accessible as properly done html/css
sites. I couldn't use most of those sites from my mobile phone for
example, whereas with html a stylesheet with a media type of 'handheld'
could be implemented with no changes to the html.
Basically you can only use most of those sites if you can see and are
using a mouse. There are lots of levels to accessibility that I'm still
plumbing the depths of. In terms of the web
usability/accessibility/code/design all need to work together in the
right balance because its kind of an omni-media. You can't lump it into
any one category other than 'web'.
And, like Christian says I'm not sure what you're asking this list for
with regards to those sites or your idea... Do you want to discuss web
standards and accessibility with regard to those sites? or do you just
want to know if we think they're pretty/usable?
What is your opinion on web accessibility?
Rob
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
