|
|
Posted by Travis Newbury on 10/09/07 15:06
On Oct 9, 6:48 am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-sicur...@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:
> > Just what is the question I am evading?
> I have not much of an idea of what Jerry is talking about eather.
Thank you! ;-)
> But
> speaking of questions, how exactly would you know what I can and can't
> do? Considering that you don't even know me??????
Did you not state that you were not a flash developer earlier in this
thread? I thought you did. Anyway, what I was referring to was if
you are not a developer in both Flash and HTML/CSS, then you would not
be qualified to say which would be faster to develop a site with.
that's all.
> While it may or may not be quicker to do it in Flash, it would cost a
> lot less in legal fees to just do it in HTML, sure it gets rid of a
> lot of things but if this Target case goes ahead those type of sites
> will be screwed. Also considering the previous case law on web
> accessibility it sets a pressident (spelling). It's been a few years
> since I did legal studies.
I find it interesting in the article about this case. Target states
that their site IS accessible based on current US laws. The judge in
California just stated that she was going to leave it to a jury to
decide. I believe that information is in the OP's link.
> BTW, I think with the changes in web technologies my skills will
> continue to change over time.
> As an example of this a few years ago I did not even know what CSS or
> HTML was!.
I completely agree. if you don';t continue to learn then you end up
closing a lot of doors.
> > > So again, I'm right.
> > Of course you are...
> Isn't everyone!.
indubitably....
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|