RE: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick wrote: But just to reiterate: even if you follow the recommended practices in Bob's document... Cna you please point me to this document, I seem to have missed it with all that was going on here over the weekend. Thanks, lisa ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Herrod, Lisa wrote: Cna you please point me to this document, I seem to have missed it with all that was going on here over the weekend. http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Lisa, it's in the archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/wsg@webstandardsgroup.org/msg15999.html -- Jan Brasna aka JohnyB :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
As this response was swallowed by the list going down, allow me to re-post. Original Message Subject: Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 14:04:27 +0100 From: Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org scott parsons wrote: A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Web browsers use standard content, namely (X)HTML/CSS/etc - native web formats, defined and ratified by the W3C. Flash is a proprietary format. Flash content is not sent out in the clear over the web, and requires a plugin to run...which effectively turns any flash into a black box running on top of a standard web page. Not everybody can access flash (not because they don't have the plugin, but because they just can't use its content), but everybody can use native web formats. Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. I'm not talking about Netscape 2. I'm talking about users who have disabled flash because their particular assistive technology (screenreader, for instance) cannot process flash content. Or users which access the web via something like Lynx, a text-based browser which does not support flash at all. there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. But just to reiterate: even if you follow the recommended practices in Bob's document, you still need to provide an (X)HTML based fallback/alternative. It's one of the core tenets of WCAG Use W3C technologies (according to specification) and follow accessibility guidelines. Where it is not possible to use a W3C technology, or doing so results in material that does not transform gracefully, provide an alternative version of the content that is accessible. http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#gl-use-w3c -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
what happened? I've received more responses like this - Original Message - From: scott parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org; IMB Recipient 1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 9:16 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Yeah, I received dozens of copies of the message, what's wrong? On 4/9/05 12:23 AM, Gizax Studios [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what happened? I've received more responses like this - Original Message - From: scott parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org; IMB Recipient 1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 9:16 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Please, scott, I'm being spammed to death with your post in this thread endlessly repeating in the WSG list. Can you hold off the barbarian hordes for a while ? Thanks Lawrence Meckan -- Lawrence Meckan Absalom Media Mob: (04) 1047 9633 ABN: 49 286 495 792 http://www.absalom.biz ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
I don't think it's him, because I only sent one copy of my previous message and I just received two copies with the rest of the stuff from the list, it may be a technical diffidulty with the list. On 4/9/05 12:41 AM, Absalom Media [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please, scott, I'm being spammed to death with your post in this thread endlessly repeating in the WSG list. Can you hold off the barbarian hordes for a while ? Thanks Lawrence Meckan ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
what happened? I've received more responses like this - Original Message - From: scott parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org; IMB Recipient 1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 9:16 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Ryan wrote: I don't think it's him, because I only sent one copy of my previous message and I just received two copies with the rest of the stuff from the list, it may be a technical diffidulty with the list. I'm still only recieving one copy of everyone else's post on the list apart from scott. Thanks Lawrence -- Lawrence Meckan Absalom Media Mob: (04) 1047 9633 ABN: 49 286 495 792 http://www.absalom.biz ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] flash and accessabilty
Patrick Lauke wrote: In and of itself, flash will never be accessible to everybody, as it requires a plugin; it's not a web native technology. A plugin huh?, I've always wondered what the difference was between having to have the flash plugin and having to have a web browser? it is very hard to see any html css website without the correct plugin (that is a browser), so why does it suddenly become so much worse when flash is required? Sorry but I have just never understood this argument, would you mind explaining? Older screenreaders can't access its content at all. So, it's important to provide accessible fallback mechanisms. Yeah but my fallback positions for older browsers, like say netscape 2 are pretty hazy, theoretically they could understand the plain html, ignoring more modern tags but I haven't really tested it recently. However, for the percentage of users that *can* use flash (have the plugin, have assistive technology that works correctly with it, etc), you should then ensure that the flash itself follows sensible, accessibility-related norms and conventions. I'd suggest having a look at Bob Regan's recent post on Flash Accessibility http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007003.cfm and the interesting WCAG 1.0 Techniques for Flash http://www.markme.com/accessibility/archives/007344.cfm (just to clarify: WCAG itself does not necessarily cover Flash, as it's not an official W3C technology...so this document makes recommendations that are similar / in sympathy with what WCAG tries to achieve, but in a Flash context). These links are really useful as I work in advertising and it is a constant battle to get any kind of adherence to accessibility requirements. But also because there are many flash designers out there who would like to learn but haven't found good resources. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
