On Monday 11 February 2008 22:26, Chuck Robey wrote: > All you folks who are focussing on YouTube are (purposefully? I don't > know) the fact that with just about half of the entire Web using flash in > one way or antoehr, not using Flash is a huge problem, as anyone who > browses without a flashplayer knows.
Just to provide a counterpoint to this sweeping generalisation, I browse without a Flash player and it's never caused me any problem at all. There are a few sites which don't work without Flash. Having checked on a number of occasions, I've found (and I stress this is a personal opinion) that heavy use of Flash is a fairly reliable marker of a site I wouldn't be interested in whatever publishing techniques were used. It's rather like the old saying in the British advertising industry: only sing in an ad if you have nothing to say. How does Flash fit in with accessibility guidelines? In many countries, a commercial site which doesn't degrade gracefully when viewed with (eg) Lynx may fall foul of legislation protecting people with disabilities such as visual impairment. In short, I think ``half of the entire Web using Flash'' may be a bit of an overstatement even if you count Flash ad banners (which frankly I can do without), and the small number of Flash-only sites I encounter hasn't caused me temporary inconvenience, never mind ``a huge problem''. Jonathan _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"