- From: Lee Roberts <leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:44:34 -0500
- To: "'Loretta Guarino Reid'" <lguarino@adobe.com>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
If browser and AT developers could foresee the future I'm sure they would develop their tools to meet everyone's future. Regrettably, I don't think that is the case. In 1995 no one expected Macromedia to develop Flash. Today, Flash is only accessible on Microsoft platforms. In 1996 no one expected SVG to be developed and the only organization to design a viewer would be Adobe. So, my best option is to always have a text alternative to fallback upon. Lee -----Original Message----- From: Loretta Guarino Reid [mailto:lguarino@adobe.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 5:40 PM To: Lee Roberts Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: Javascript alternatives not necessary? Lee, what should we be telling the developers of these new technologies that they need to do before their techology doesn't need a text alternative for accessibility? Or will it always be the case that they need a text alternative? > While we focus upon things like JavaScript, SVG and Flash, who says > that some smart person won't come up with a new technology? Each time > we have a new technology come up we are in the same position ... it > won't work on all platforms and in all assistive technology. > Therefore, we must have a fallback position. > > That fallback position must be an equivalent text alternative. > > Lee Roberts > http://www.roserockdesign.com > http://www.applepiecart.com
Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:51:24 UTC