- From: Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 19:32:38 +0200
- To: <lguarino@adobe.com>, "'Tina Holmboe'" <tina@greytower.net>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of lguarino@adobe.com Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 7:23 PM To: Tina Holmboe Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: R: NEW: Issue #1544 We seem to be getting baseline issues and validity issues entangled here. Let us hypothesize a baseline that includes Flash. Today, that probably means an environment where all users are guaranteed access to Window + IE + JAWS or WindowEyes. If content in that environment makes Flash accessible via use of the <embed> object, but otherwise satisfies all the WCAG success criteria, should the content be judged not in compliance with WCAG 2 because it does not validate? Roberto Scano: No, the content should be judged not in compilance because if baseline includes Flash, the Flash content must be accessible not only in Windows + IE + Jaws or WindowEyes but also with other browsers. Otherwise, we are making like some web sites that wrote : optimized for IE 800x600 16 million colours. Loretta: If a baseline doesn't include Flash, perhaps because the audience is using non-Windows platforms, then alternative content is clearly required for the Flash content. Roberto Scano: Yes. It is true. But is required also in the first case, due that Flash is accessible only with Windows + IE + ScreenReader.
Received on Saturday, 13 August 2005 17:32:51 UTC