E-mail List Archives
Thread: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
Number of posts in this thread: 11 (In chronological order)
From: Paul Collins
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 2:50AM
Subject: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
No previous message | Next message →
Hi all,
I have a question regarding the swfObject / flashObject method of embedding movies. When a user doesn't have Flash or Javascript enabled, they will get the content in the div appropriately named that preceeds the Flash. What happens if a user comes in with Flash and Javascript installed and a screen reader that supports both? Will they get the content in the preceeding DIV as well as the Flash?
Here is an example I found:
http://www1.orange.co.uk/entertainment/photography/cameraPhones.php
If you disable the Jscript, the content in <div id="flashcontent"> appears. If someone had a screenreader that works with javascript, would they go straight to the Flash or will they pick up the HTML code in the source. Or will they pick up both?!
What would be the best practice; would you have a hidden title/label in the Flash that could direct the user to a suitable HTML version? Would you provide a visible link on the page to take them to a new page containing the HTML version? Or will this work OK if the Flash has been built with Accessibility in mind?
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Cheers,
Paul
From: Karl Groves
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 5:50AM
Subject: RE: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
The user of the screen reader will get the Flash if the screenreader
supports it.
Keep in mind that "accessible" Flash is only really possible since Flash MX.
Also keep in mind that support for those new accessible features is *very*
spotty so, while it may "appear" to a screenreader, it still might be
unusable depending on the brand & version of the screenreader.
It is important to remember though, that accessibility isn't just about
blind people. IMO, Flash can be more accessible than HTML. Its self-voicing
capabilities can eliminate the need for a screenreader, and its use of
scalable graphics can make it easy to enlarge things without bad distortion.
All it takes is someone with a strong, in-depth knowledge of Flash.
Karl L. Groves
User-Centered Design, Inc.
Office: 703-729-0998
Mobile: 443-889-8763
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web: http://www.user-centereddesign.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Paul Collins
> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 4:43 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: [WebAIM] Flash (swf) object and alternatives
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have a question regarding the swfObject / flashObject
> method of embedding movies. When a user doesn't have Flash or
> Javascript enabled, they will get the content in the div
> appropriately named that preceeds the Flash. What happens if
> a user comes in with Flash and Javascript installed and a
> screen reader that supports both? Will they get the content
> in the preceeding DIV as well as the Flash?
>
> Here is an example I found:
> http://www1.orange.co.uk/entertainment/photography/cameraPhones.php
>
> If you disable the Jscript, the content in <div
> id="flashcontent"> appears. If someone had a screenreader
> that works with javascript, would they go straight to the
> Flash or will they pick up the HTML code in the source. Or
> will they pick up both?!
>
> What would be the best practice; would you have a hidden
> title/label in the Flash that could direct the user to a
> suitable HTML version? Would you provide a visible link on
> the page to take them to a new page containing the HTML
> version? Or will this work OK if the Flash has been built
> with Accessibility in mind?
>
> Would love to hear your thoughts.
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
>
>
>
From: Alastair Campbell
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 6:00AM
Subject: RE: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
Karl Groves wrote:
> Its self-voicing capabilities can eliminate the need for a
screenreader,
Well, apart from the person being able to open a browser and get to the
flash in the first place!
> scalable graphics can make it easy to enlarge things without
> bad distortion.
I agree, but it leads to one of my bugbears about Flash, perhaps you
know about this? Why don't web sites let people make use of the
scalability?
So many sites lock the flash into a part of the window, or a pop-up with
a fixed size, meaning you can't easily scale it up. (Very frustrating on
a laptop with 16" screen and 1600x1200 resolution).
Does something go wrong when you increase the window size, or does it
just look wrong to the eagle eyed designer?
> All it takes is someone with a strong, in-depth knowledge of Flash.
Definitely, doesn't see to happen often :-/
Kind regards,
-Alastair
From: Paul Collins
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 7:30AM
Subject: Re: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
> Its self-voicing capabilities can eliminate the need for a
screenreader,
I guess the problem here is that people generally don't incorporate this into the budget, they merely want to meet basic accessibility requirements. With this in mind I would like to do my best to make the site accessible, by way of providing alternative content. I will also ensure the Flash developer turns accessibility features on in Flash as they work.
> The user of the screen reader will get the Flash if the screenreader
supports it.
With this in mind, is it worth putting your alternative Flash content in the fallback div (id="flashcontent") at all or should this just be text telling you to get Flash? Then, I guess you could provide a visible link to a new page that has the content, perhaps linking it from the flashcontent div also. This way people could make an informed decision to go to the HTML version if the Flash file wasn't working well enough with their screenreader.
Does this make sense to anyone and do they have a better idea?!
Cheers
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Alastair Campbell
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 12:56 PM
Subject: RE: [WebAIM] Flash (swf) object and alternatives
Karl Groves wrote:
> Its self-voicing capabilities can eliminate the need for a
screenreader,
Well, apart from the person being able to open a browser and get to the
flash in the first place!
> scalable graphics can make it easy to enlarge things without
> bad distortion.
I agree, but it leads to one of my bugbears about Flash, perhaps you
know about this? Why don't web sites let people make use of the
scalability?
So many sites lock the flash into a part of the window, or a pop-up with
a fixed size, meaning you can't easily scale it up. (Very frustrating on
a laptop with 16" screen and 1600x1200 resolution).
Does something go wrong when you increase the window size, or does it
just look wrong to the eagle eyed designer?
> All it takes is someone with a strong, in-depth knowledge of Flash.
Definitely, doesn't see to happen often :-/
Kind regards,
-Alastair
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 9:10AM
Subject: RE: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
For SWFObject, I have some data at:
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/accessibility/archives/2005/08/in_search_o
f_a.cfm#comments
> The user of the screen reader will get the Flash if the
> screenreader supports it.
Correct.
> Keep in mind that "accessible" Flash is only really possible
> since Flash MX.
That's right. Almost. Technically, there are a couple of things going
on. As of Flash player 6 textual information in flash content (even
flash content published pre-MX) is exposed and can be spoken. You are
correct that support in the authoring tool and support within the
scripting language to modify the accessibility object within flash
content started with the release of Flash MX.
Flash MX was released in 2002, almost 5 years ago.
> Also keep in mind that support for those new accessible
> features is *very* spotty so, while it may "appear" to a
> screenreader, it still might be unusable depending on the
> brand & version of the screenreader.
Flash content can be read in:
JAWS 4.50, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 (beta)
Window-Eyes 4.2, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5
HAL/Supernova (not sure of the version numbers off hand)
ZoomText 8.1, 9.0
We do not have a version of the Flash player for Firefox that delivers
accessibility information yet.
> It is important to remember though, that accessibility isn't
> just about blind people. IMO, Flash can be more accessible
> than HTML. Its self-voicing capabilities can eliminate the
> need for a screenreader, and its use of scalable graphics can
I've seen very few self-voicing apps done well (in Flash or otherwise).
There is tremendous value provided by assistive technologies that most
developers are not aware of. That being said, thre are interesting
additional possibilities that Flash is good at providing that can help
provide information beyond what a screen reader provides.
AWK
Andrew Kirkpatrick
Corporate Accessibility Engineering Lead
Adobe Systems
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 10:00AM
Subject: RE: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
> Does this make sense to anyone and do they have a better idea?!
We really have to know a) why flash is being used to begin with and b)
what the content is within the flash to best answer this.
-Darrel
From: Paul Collins
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 10:10AM
Subject: Re: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
>> Does this make sense to anyone and do they have a better idea?!
> We really have to know a) why flash is being used to begin with and b)
what the content is within the flash to best answer this.
I would try the original example I sent as a start, however I guess your point is to take it on a case by case basis.
http://www1.orange.co.uk/entertainment/photography/cameraPhones.php
Cheers
----- Original Message -----
From: Austin, Darrel
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 4:57 PM
Subject: RE: [WebAIM] Flash (swf) object and alternatives
> Does this make sense to anyone and do they have a better idea?!
We really have to know a) why flash is being used to begin with and b)
what the content is within the flash to best answer this.
-Darrel
From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 10:20AM
Subject: RE: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
> All it takes is someone with a strong, in-depth knowledge of Flash.
And a user/customer base willing to tolerate it. ;o)
-Darrel
From: Stephanie Sullivan
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 11:10AM
Subject: Re: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
On 9/12/06 7:56 AM, "Alastair Campbell" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Does something go wrong when you increase the window size, or does it
> just look wrong to the eagle eyed designer?
I believe many times, it's the aspect ratio... My sons school's site last
year was Flash. I guess you'd call it "scalable Flash" because it was the
size of your browser window -- whatever that might be. It was really ugly if
you didn't have a 4x3 aspect ratio open (who does anymore?) the circular
objects looked really wonky. (I would have linked you so you could see, but
I just looked and they've changed it -- set width now. ;))
Stef.
Stephanie Sullivan
Community MX Partner :: http://www.communitymx.com/author.cfm?cid=1008
Adobe Community Expert :: http://tinyurl.com/6huw3
Dreamweaver Task Force for WaSP
From: Alastair Campbell
Date: Tue, Sep 12 2006 11:30AM
Subject: RE: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | Next message →
Stephanie Sullivan wrote:
> I believe many times, it's the aspect ratio... It was
> really ugly if you didn't have a 4x3 aspect ratio open
Oh, I had thought that you would just get the canvas around the side?
Trying a quick site (mentioned previously as accessible), if you load
the J K Rowling site's flash directly:
http://www.jkrowling.com/f7b3qash/level_0.swf
You can't upset the aspect ratio, but you can see the objects that are
intended to be off screen.
I'm sure they could be hidden, are there any other reasons people don't
link straight to the flash? Do you need HTML/scripting for accessing
databases or something?
If that were the case, surely having the flash 100% wide/high in a
standard page (or even pop-up) would be better? (For pure flash sites
that is.)
Kind regards,
-Alastair
--
Alastair Campbell | Director of User Experience
Nomensa Email Disclaimer:
http://www.nomensa.com/email-disclaimer.html
From: ben morrison
Date: Wed, Sep 13 2006 3:40AM
Subject: Re: Flash (swf) object and alternatives
← Previous message | No next message
On 9/12/06, Alastair Campbell < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Stephanie Sullivan wrote:
> > I believe many times, it's the aspect ratio... It was
> > really ugly if you didn't have a 4x3 aspect ratio open
>
> Oh, I had thought that you would just get the canvas around the side?
>
> Trying a quick site (mentioned previously as accessible), if you load
> the J K Rowling site's flash directly:
> http://www.jkrowling.com/f7b3qash/level_0.swf
>
> You can't upset the aspect ratio, but you can see the objects that are
> intended to be off screen.
>
> I'm sure they could be hidden, are there any other reasons people don't
> link straight to the flash? Do you need HTML/scripting for accessing
> databases or something?
Some browsers may have difficulty with playing the swf and try and
download the file instead.
> If that were the case, surely having the flash 100% wide/high in a
> standard page (or even pop-up) would be better? (For pure flash sites
> that is.)
You can make flash behave like liquid layouts, its just upto the
individual programmer.
Quick google for 'onResize flash'
http://www.tutorio.com/tutorial/liquid-flash-layout
ben
--
Ben Morrison