- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:39:35 -0500
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Chaals, Good news that SVG is progressing past vaporware! It is still not an easily-available option for a page author, especially one who does not have a pioneering sense about digital design ... Anyone who uses SVG on their page needs to provide a link to download the viewer if they don't want to frustrate users with a blank screen ... Unless you count e-mail readers as early browsers, there was no beginning of Internet hyperlinking before images were included ... but do correct me if my memory is faulty .... Anne At 11:02 AM 10/28/01 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >This is simply untrue. Cognitively disabled users who are looking for >animated content have every reason to prefer SVG over other formats, or at >least every reason that can be advanced for using flash. > >SVG is not vapourware, it works in animated form now using a readily >available plugin, it works in at least two static form that supports >accessibility features. > >To make general handwaving assertions about how hard things might be is not >helpful. We need to assess the technologies available, and the solutions they >can provide, and then what is on the horizon that we should think about in >order to provide a better solution as the technology improves. > >Otherwise we would be using text-only browsers. > >Charles Anne Pemberton apembert@erols.com http://www.erols.com/stevepem http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
Received on Sunday, 28 October 2001 18:43:30 UTC