On 1/10/09 8:26 AM, "Alan C Whiteman" <acwhite...@visualis.us> wrote: > In the end, Flash is not only an obnoxious medium in 90% of its usage
...which is not a problem owing to the platform but rather its authors... (Besides, that's consistent with Sturgeon's Law: "90% of everything is crap.") > it's technically bad for SEO. ...which isn't generally germane to learning management systems, given that their users tend to be inside an intranet to begin with. In any case, Google (among other engines) does in fact index Flash content, and has a list of guidelines for doing so: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/06/improved-flash-indexing.h tml >> But if we don't have people pushing >> that envelope, doesn't that make that statement self-fulfilling prophecy? > > As a proprietary technology, Adobe can have the burden of making its > technology better and more compliant. You mean like settling on industry-standard audio and video formats, like MP3 and H.264? We do that. SCORM support for our e-Learning products? That too. Hey, maybe we could open-source the Flex language, including its compiler: http://opensource.adobe.com/flex Whether that adds up to "better" or not isn't up to me to say. But it's not the same platform it was 5 years ago, to be sure. Unfortunately, it's usually argued over as though it were. Thanks, m ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *******************************************************************
