- From: Stephane Deschamps <stephane.deschamps@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 22:24:04 +0200
- To: Ginger Claassen <ginger.claassen@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Accessys@smart.net" <accessys@smart.net>, Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Ginger Claassen <ginger.claassen@gmx.de> wrote: > Hi all, > > well, the student is not blind and I cannot see the realtion between the > fact that a tool might not be accessible and the result not being > accessible. > My only interest lies in the fact to make a silverlight application > accessible to the user. The tool to create it is of no importance at all at > this point of time. Hi Ginger, Sorry for being late responding. I was at a seminary by Microsoft about UI Automation, Microsoft's new accessibility layer, and we talked about Silverlight too. What I gather is that, in a Windows environment, Silverlight is as accessible as Flash. Turned the other way round and from my experience with Flash, expect: - it will work best in Windows - it will work best in Internet Explorer - Flash accessiiblity is an awful lot of work. I don't have experience with Silverlight yet, but I expect user experience to be sub-par in terms of interoperability and accessibility, and costly in your efforts to be accessible within these constraints. At the moment I'm still advising people to use W3C technologies (HTML, CSS) with a bit of Ajax when needed (and the usual testing phase of Javascript on and off, as well as testing Ajax with screen readers, Yellow-fade techniques, etc). (so you see you're not too off-topic for this list, come to think of it) ;) -- Stéphane Deschamps perso: http://www.nota-bene.org/ org: http://www.pompage.net/
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 20:24:51 UTC