On 8/6/07, zwetan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > but screen reader missing feature for Flash Lite and PSP player > is kind of a joke
I can only guess that you think this is a "joke" because you're making assumptions about what visually impaired users wish to, and can in fact, do, without looking into it at all. Visually impaired users want to (and do) play games and use mobile devices. Here's some discussions of inaccessibility issues of such devices on the website of the American Federation of the Blind: http://www.afb.org/afbpress/pub.asp?DocID=aw080306 http://www.afb.org/Section.asp?SectionID=47&DocumentID=3577 And here's a blind gamer describing how to play Lord of the Rings on the PSP: http://www.brandoncole.net/gaming/LOTR%20Tactics%20Demo.mp3 Second, even more serious is the missing Flash support for screen reader users of Firefox, Linux, and Mac OS X. > "hey why not hook my screen reader to use my cell > phone or my PSP"...scenario There are dedicated screen readers for such devices, such as Nuance Talks: http://www.nuance.com/talks/premium.asp > I could even return this argument, > Flash player Lite can play midi files, Flash player (browser plugin) can not > does that make sens ? > I think yes Not if universal functionality is used as rationale for keeping the format closed, no. > Here another argument: > it's not because something is open source > that it is obviously better and spread better as "have to use tool", > take the ogg vorbis format for audio, > it's been around for quite some time now > technically it got better features than the mp3 format and wouhou it's > open source, > but you know what ? > how many people do use it on a daily basis ? > is it more widespread than the mp3 format ? This analogy is irrelevant to my argument, which is that Adobe is failing to provide consistent functionality. It's pretty obvious that if you're a screen reader user who prefers Firefox, an open source player you can use is better than a closed source player you can't. > mind me, if the flash player were open source, > and some people contributed ogg playback inside flash, > that would be cool for us geeks > btu the mainstream would still want to use mp3 first. We're not talking about open sourcing the Adobe Flash Player. We're talking about opening up the Flash specification to implementers of /other/ players. > so yeah you can blame Macromedia/Adobe > to have a closed source flash player and because of that > you're stuck and can not playback ogg file format > or whatever else features you're missing > > but on the other end Macromedia/Adobe did implemented > the most wanted feature: playback mp3, and also > most of the other features that make sens. Neither Zárate nor I are talking about adding missing features to Flash; we're talking about providing consistent functionality across platforms. I think that adding features to Flash would need to happen with Adobe's oversight, rather than on an ad hoc basis. Banning other implementers from reading the spec is an utterly ineffective way of providing such oversight. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
