Thanks for that exposition, Chris. It should really be in a blog or wiki. Much appreciated.
Teresa On Jul 15, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Chris Blouch wrote: > Thought I just posted this in another thread so I'll post again with a bit > more detail. > > Flash can be accessible on platforms that use the MSAA (Microsoft Active > Accessibility) APIs which means not on the Mac. Adobe also supports the newer > cross platform IAccessible2 accessibility APIs so it also works with browsers > and screen readers which support this such as Firefox on on Linux or the > like. The spat is that Adobe claims Apple should just implement IAccessible2 > on OSX and then Flash accessibility would be possible. Obviously Apple has > already implemented their own full accessibility API. I'm sure they think > it's better than IAccessible2 and so they say Adobe should just hook flash > into the accessibility APIs Apple already provides, just like anything else > that runs on OSX. Or, somebody should sponsor implementing an IAccessible2 to > Apple accessibility API bridge for OSX, but nobody seems to be interested in > implementing that (not to mention that somebody would probably have to be > Apple and they already implemented a perfectly dandy API, thank you very > much). > > As an aside, this is the same issues we have with Firefox and Thunderbird not > being accessible since they support the IAccessible2 stuff and really don't > care to implement another accessibility API (Apple's) unless somebody wants > to sponsor it. > > So we have Adobe and Apple both pointing at each other while Flash remains > inaccessible on OSX. Of course Apple's anti-Flash letter from Jobs didn't > help to increase the love. > > Even if all the above were resolved, there are three technical hurdles that > tend to block Flash accessibility even on Windows today: > > 1. WMODE > When embedding flash in a page there is a wmode setting. The default is to > not really put flash in the page. Rather the browser engine leaves a blank > spot and the Flash plugin renders the flash stuff on top of the page. > Normally people don't notice but when layering gets involved the illusion of > flash being nestled in the HTML can be broken. Common bad scenario is a flash > ad where fake html pull-down menus go under the flash. Sooo, folks will > change the wmode to something called "opaque" or "transparent" which really > does put it into the DOM render tree so it plays nice with CSS layers etc. > Unfortunatly this change also breaks access to the MSAA or IAccessible2 APIs > rendering the Flash inaccessible even on Windows/Jaws/NVDA etc. This is not > that uncommon with all the widget wizardry going on now days in web pages > where they need flash to behave itself when it comes to CSS layers. > > 2. Flash a11y off by default > While it's not hard to enable, the demos I've been to at CSUN and other > places showing how to make accessible flash usually involve turning on some > checkboxes which are off by default. That's just a bad choice as many flash > developers are either unaware or don't care about accessibility. Even if they > do care or somehow stumble upon these settings and turn them on, they also > have to go through, just like in any other development environment, and label > their buttons and such, which often is not done. So you get a "button button" > or "Graphic 14" for the UI elements. A situation familiar to any voiceover > user. > > 3. Wacky UIs > A common, almost cherished aspect of Flash development is that it's good for > creating those cutting edge unusual UIs that would be difficult to create in > straight HTML/CSS/JS and standards controls. To say it the other way, fi all > we needed was normal user interface stuff we could just do that in HTML, not > that some Flash developers don't see it as a giant hammer to nail every UI. > By definition this means they are rolling their own user interface elements > rather than using the standard ones provided by Adobe. As on all other > platforms, developers who create custom controls often are unaware or don't > care to do the work to hook them into the accessibility APIs. So Flash's most > common use case/justification often exposes the worst in user interface > accessibility. > > So in summary, if we stick to standard controls, turn on accessibility, fill > in proper accessibility attributes in the UI builder or know how to add them > in actionscript, embed the thing in a non-layer friendly way and load it on > Windows in an MSAA or Iaccessible2 compliant browser the Flash will be nice > and accessible. > > Anyone care to guess the odds of that happening? And, if you're on a Mac, > obviously the odds of success are 0. > > CB > > On 7/15/11 5:40 PM, Eric Oyen wrote: >> ok, >> I stand corrected. >> still, it such a pain in the butt to have to deal with websites that have >> nothing but flash. take my cell provider: t-mobile. they use flash to >> display plan info, billing details and payment input fields. >> >> I have repeatedly notified them of the problem over the last year, but to no >> avail. I am now in the process of breaking my contract with themand I will >> contest their early termination fee on contractual and legal grounds. I have >> an iPhone from AT&T that I intend to use. AT&T, at least, has an >> accessibility resolutions Dept where t-mobile does not. about the only other >> thing I can do is sue t-mobile, but I don't yet have the support from the >> NFB or other organizations. I hate to have to do this, but these guys aren't >> giving me a lot of choices. >> >> -Eric >> >> On Jul 15, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Ricardo Walker wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> Apple not supporting Flash, at least on the Mac, is not true. Its just >>> that Adobe Flash is no longer pre installed on Macs. >>> >>> hth >>> Ricardo Walker >>> rwalker...@gmail.com >>> Twitter, Skype,& AIM: rwalker296 >>> www.mobileaccess.org >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jul 15, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Eric Oyen wrote: >>> >>>> flash is such a pain mostly because the company never bothered to make it >>>> accessible. unfortunately, there is no screen reader that can readit. as >>>> for apple support, you are correct. >>>> >>>> one point, the place you are taking the course from may be violating the >>>> US ADA and you might have legal recourse. >>>> >>>> -Eric >>>> >>>> On Jul 15, 2011, at 11:20 AM, Karen Lewellen wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> Can anyone send me a simple source that explains why flash is such a >>>>> major closed door? >>>>> I am *trying* to get access to an on line course, where the audio for the >>>>> class would be just as good, especially with what one must pay. even >>>>> their order page triggers a forbidden error, so i want to educate the >>>>> company if I can that they may be shedding customers this way. >>>>> I sort of remember Apple talking about no longer supporting flash, so >>>>> that is certainly a start. anything or anywhere else I might send them? >>>>> thanks, >>>>> Karen >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
