Re: Potential clarification of Web Content/User Agent

The thinking on Flash was that it ran in a browser and using a plugin and
therefor was web content.




(Note: Silverlight didn't exist until after the bulk of WCAG was written...
I think it started to show up late 2007)

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 5:52 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> Patrick wrote:
> >  If that was the original intent even in WCAG 2.0, this would be an
> editorial change, rather than a substantive change, that should be easy to
> incorporate into WCAG 2.1?
>
> That seems reasonable.
>
> My original intent in asking this was to see if anyone mentioned Flash or
> Silverlight. Crickets on that…
>
> My suggestion for what we consider for 2.1 is: are there people prepared
> to write techniques for a technology?
>
> I.e. We can’t be held hostage by a defunct technology that isn’t being
> updated and has no-one available to contribute techniques.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Alastair
>
>