|
|
Posted by Brendan Gillatt on 10/10/07 20:58
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:49:04 +0100, Brendan Gillatt
> <brendanREMOVETHIS@brendanREMOVETHISgillatt.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> Did you really just say that? Did you actually say flash has a wider
>>>> cross-compatibility than plain HTML?
>
>>> Depends on how "plain" you mean. HTML's inherent flaw is that the way
>>> it looks on one browser/OS is often NOT the way it will look on
>>> another. It's that inconsistency which makes it non cross-compatible.
>>> Just because you can take a square peg and rip it all up into little
>>> pieces doesn't mean that it fits in a round hole, cause what yer
>>> gettin out on the other end ain't a square peg...it's retarded
>>> bullshit, that's all you're getting. Flash is more cross compatible
>>> in that what in looks like on one machine/browser is pretty much
>>> exactly the way it's going to look on another machine/browser.
>>>
>>> Your deficient line of thinking is to sacrifice design
>
>> You mean your site has a good design?
>
> Try not taking your Ritalin for a few days and you'll see it.
>
>>> usability
>
>> Do you even check 508? You do realise that flash is nearly impossible for
>> screen readers to interpret.
>
> You do realize that it's entirely up to the developer to make their
> site as accessible as they want. Most don't really give a rats ass
> about blind people so they skip it, but that doesn't mean that it's
> "nearly impossible". Like the Flash based web board I'm developing,
> all the actual content is stored in XML files, which can be accessed
> directly both inside and outside the Flash construct.
So how the hell is the screen-reader supposed to select whether it
attempts to parse the flash or go and retrieve an XML file which, for it
considers, is an entirely different resource.
> Also one shouldn't blame the tech, one should blame those who make the
> screen reader software for not updating their product to work with the
> latest technologies.
How do you suppose those companies read flash content? Please - I'm sure
they'd snap at the opportunity to do so.
> Same with Lynx, it really wouldn't be difficult
> to program in a Flash decompile that could extract all the readable
> text from a Flash file.
No really, it would. Flash is dynamic; how is supposed to tell the pages
apart? In your site every 'link' loads a new swf file into the 'main.swf'
movie yet they aren't given a unique URL, effectively making your site
one big page so far as lynx would be concerned (even if it was to be
bloated with a flash decompiler).
> Instead they blame their laziness on Flash,
> rather than getting off their stupid asses and updating their shit.
> If Google can spider text content in Flash files...anybody can.
Since when can google do that?
See http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35267
>>> and
>>> stability
>
>> Flash is somehow more stable than plain ASCII now?
>
> Oh so now you're not even talking about having sites with any HTML and
> CSS?
Correct, they are written in ASCII.
> Yes, I suppose that'd be the most stable way, however your
> original argument centered on CSS formatting that would break on IE5
> for teh Mac where as the Flash equivalent was smaller in size and
> WOULD NOT break.
>
>>> This from the retard who thinks he can embed fonts into HTML code.
>
>> When did I say that? Please quote, my usenet archives are obviously
>> incorrect.
>
> I wrote:
>
> "One should probably also mention the fact that Flash allows for
> custom, embedded font types and proper font anti-aliasing, both of
> which HTML is wholly incapable of achieving."
>
> Then you replied with:
>
> "Sure it is - I know for a fact it can do so on a Solaris graphics
> workstation."
>
> Think slow now, don't hurt yourself.
When did I say that the fonts are embedded in the HTML? No where in that
quote. The page is certainly capable of specifying which fonts are
desirable for the page. It is up to the user to decide if they like the
site author's font tastes or stick with their own.
- --
Brendan Gillatt
brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk
http://www.brendangillatt.co.uk
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBACD7433
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFHDTz7kA9dCbrNdDMRAsEIAJ4mzbnRYqDSC8AJt5LtbWcbrf54KgCgmiMA
R25lUFaZt8Ugvr8mCHzZJ48=
=XD6J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|