W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2000

Macromedia Flash

From: Paul Booth <paul@disinhe.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 11:57:02 -0000
To: "W3c-Wai-Ig@W3.Org \(E-mail\)" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001201bf93f5$bcaba7a0$f2222486@dyn.computing.dundee.ac.uk>
I've recently been asked some questions about Macromedia Flash.

I've been looking through the archives and found some postings about this
way back in September of last year.

I understand how using the OBJECT element to provide more than just simple
alt text, or by providing an image map for users who don't have the flash
plug-in can be used to increase the accessibility of flash.  (See

I've noticed in a few web sites recently the use of more complex flash
pieces for substantial parts of their web sites (i.e. a number of connected
scenes instead of a stand alone scene that points to other web pages).  I
guess this falls under Checkpoint 1.1 in the WCAG checklist - but what if
the content is too dynamic to really allow meaningful text equivalents?  Or
is there a way around this. (or was that what was described previously but I
didn't pick up on it?).

Is it the case, that as far as users with screen readers go, that there is
not really much that can be done for sites that use complex flash apart from
have non-flash versions. (I was at a Macromedia demo recently where they
claimed there was no longer a need to do that as everyone had the flash

This is the case, should it be a recommendation (of a body such as mine)
that users do not use Flash.  (and given that, does anyone know if
Macromedia are doing anything about it).

Can anyone point me to any resources about Flash & accessibility?


- Paul
Paul Booth, Project Officer, DISinHE Office.
Disability and Information Systems in Higher Education
t: 01382 345050 f: 01382 345509 w: http://www.disinhe.ac.uk/
Received on Wednesday, 22 March 2000 06:56:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:08 UTC