W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2001

XML generated "Flash" (was: A few questions)

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:42:35 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200102101142.f1ABgZL19695@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> course of R&D we developed a Flash based version of the products
> output, where we send XML to Flash. From the point of view of

Have you investigated SVG?  This is the native W3C/XML alternative
to Flash.  Like Flash, users will have to download a plugin at the 
moment.  There is early work on native support in Mozilla (~NS6), but
commercial factors will decide whether IE ever supports it natively.
The current plugins are betas based on an evolving (but I think it
is now relase candidate status) specification.

> accessibility this seems to offer a solution to many of the problems
> with Flash, since the same XML can also be transformed into HTML (the
> browser could be queried to find the best version to send). However

The problem with these technologies (Flash and SVG) is that most
authors do not have the budget, or motivation, to provide alternatives.
If Flash/SVG matches their target market better than HTML, they will
produce a Flash/SVG only site that makes no concession at all to people
requiring text only or non-animated versions.  (SVG has some design
goals for text fallback and also, being XML, is subject to alternative
transformations of the XML, in the way you suggest, but both of these
require commitment from authors and won't automatically drop out of the
use of WYSIWYG authoring tools.)
Received on Saturday, 10 February 2001 08:35:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:53 GMT