Posted by SpaceGirl on 10/09/07 17:03

Jonathan N. Little wrote:

> You keep saying this, talk is cheap. If the content is basically text
> using Flash appears not to add value but lend to complications in
> bandwidth (maybe not the initial download but the bottom line time to
> display) and versatility for user accessibility unless carefully
> engineered by the flash designer (although I have jet to witness an
> example of this too)

You are ignoring the user experience. This can be as important as your
content, if not MORE important, depending on the context.

Also, once again, Flash IS ACCESSIBLE. It can be screen read, it
supports CSS and tagging (as in alternative), plus it's a presentational
layer. You may as well accuse MPEG movies, or JPEG images of being
inaccessible. It's all about HOW it's used.

Look up FlashPaper, you may be surprised.

--

x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

http://www.northleithmill.com

-.-

Kammy has a new home: http://www.bitesizedjapan.com

• Next in forum: Re: It does not look good for Target. Web Accessibility news
• Prev in forum: Re: It does not look good for Target. Web Accessibility news
• Thread view: Re: It does not look good for Target. Web Accessibility news

[Reply to this message]