WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Bridge page wording

for

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Jun 23, 2005 10:07AM

>> flash can be
>> designed to be accessible. Anything that isn't accessible is a lack of
>> intent (whether due to the preference of the client or not)
>
> as in "the client has a preference not to buy the very latest version
> of
> Windows Eyes to access the flash"?

I understand your point here, but want to point out that while it was
once correct to say that you need the latest version of JAWS or
Window-Eyes to access Flash, this is no longer true. It is worthwhile
to be accurate rather than have this type of statement become part of
the accessibility dogma that newcomers hear and assume is true.

Blind or visually impaired users need one of the following versions of
an assistive technology tool:
JAWS 4.5
JAWS 5.0
JAWS 5.1
JAWS 6.0
JAWS 6.1
Window-Eyes 4.2
Window-Eyes 4.5
Window-Eyes 5.0
IBM HomePage Reader 3.04
Dolphin HAL/Supernova 5.0
ZoomText Magnifier/ScreenReader 8.1

> or a failure of budget, or sheer impossibility of making it accessible
> (or how would YOU make a flash game a la Pong or similar accessible to
> a
> screenreader user, for instance).

It doesn't sound like that's what Chris is talking about. If he's made
an equivalent HTML site, I feel confident that the Flash one doesn't
have Pong! You're right in that some things, such as many games, can't
be accessible in Flash (or java, ajax, svg, etc), but a web site with
text, links, and graphics can be accessible as long as the user has a
tool that supports it. For those kinds of sites is there a point in
time where you'd say that an HTML fallback for the site is no longer
needed?

AWK

--
Andrew Kirkpatrick
WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
125 Western Ave.
Boston, MA 02134
E-mail: <EMAIL REMOVED>
617.300.4420