Thread Subject: Re: Second Life
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Thu, Aug 02 2007 5:35 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Will Pearson: "Re: Second Life"
- Previous message in thread: Peter Korn: "Re: Second Life"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
Sorry if I wasn't clear. HTTP was the test for WEB CONTENT not
Applications. And it wasn't that they used HTTP to fetch, it was that they
were FETCHED by HTTP.
Yes Second Life would be a network application - but we were separating
network from Web. Web is a subset of network.
Agree with you that if we do this right - "Second life" should be covered
one way or the other.
My comment was just in response to someone saying we didn't need to worry
about SL. I think we do need to be sure that our guidelines (all together)
make sense for these types of applications.
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Peter Korn
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 6:16 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Second Life
> Just a quite note on one of your comments. You wrote:
> > 2) Is Second Life actually a Web application as we have
> defined them
> > or is it just a software program that interacts with data
> over the Internet.
> > You use HTTP to download an install program. But you could
> also have
> > one sent to you by a buddy via the US mail if you wanted
> to. Once you
> > install it
> > - doest it use HTTP to access content? Or does it use another
> > protocol. If not HTTP then it isn't web content as we have
> defined it.
> I don't think protocol (e.g. HTTP) is a good test of whether
> something is a "web application" or not. Desktop
> applications (e.g. a ".exe") can choose to speak HTTP or not
> as part of their network communication. In fact, by your
> test, Netscape and IE are "web applications" because they
> "use HTTP to access content"...
> If the application requires connection to a server or other
> computers over a network (as this one does), it is certainly
> a "network application". If the application is delivered via
> the web (cf. Java Web
> Start) but can thereafter be launched directly from your
> desktop, then it is a "web-delivered application".
> I suggest that if the only way to use an application is via
> the web browser, *then* it is a "web application".
> Getting back to Second Life and similar virtual worlds
> So long as our guidelines (whether "software" or "web application")
> result in requiring that all of the inaccessible parts of
> Second Life be
> accessible - that is to say, if every inaccessible aspect of
> Second Life
> is also a violation of our proposed guidelines - then I think
> we are in
> good shape from a guidelines point of view.
> Peter Korn
> Accessibility Architect,
> Sun Microsystems, Inc.