Re: FN-FORUM: How widespread is Flash Player these days?

date posted 7th September 2007 01:03



Mike Duguid wrote:
> Adam Reynolds
>>> Your issue is also one of accessibility. Flash isn't and..
>>>
>
> Not true in either case (despite being stated as 'fact'). These are
> misconceptions typical of standardistas that don't use flash, and have
> no interest in educating themselves about its contemporary use.
>
> I suggest a read of http://warpspire.com/journal/web-production/7-flash-myths/
>
>
I suggest you read it in the context of the statement you made above.
Flash 7 ( note the version) is not accessible. It is something Adobe are
trying to address in Flash 9 ( and Flex). The best implementation I have
seen so far to make Flash accessible is where it sits on top of a XHTML
compliant website and the flash reads in the website and does it's funky
stuff. The website is still accessible to text readers etc, but the
interface has been flashified to make it more funky for those people
that can handle it.

Please do not sit there and state bullshit about how Flash 7 is
accessible. Parts of it can be made accessible within very limited
coding practices, and even Adobe admit that it's just about getting
there with Flash 9. It won't actually ever be 100% accessible. It's got
the same issues that Ajax has. To create a Rich Internet Application you
end up sacrificing accessibility IF the only way the application runs is
through Flash/DHTML/Silverlight/etc.

I like Flash (in particular I love Flex), but there is no way I am using
Flash with the "it can be made accessible" moniker. You can believe
Adobe's hype if you want to, but the reality is, it needs to be text
readable.

Adam