[thelist] flash accessibility/usability
Daniel J. Cody
djc at members.evolt.org
Tue Feb 26 19:22:01 CST 2002
.jeff wrote:
>>using an absurd example is flawed logically. of course
>>'logos & flames' won't make you want to buy things.
>><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
>>
>
> no kidding. that just proves my point though. it seems that when it really
> comes down to it, the argument for flash is "it makes shit move". so what!
i don't think using an outrageous example proves anything actually. as
for the 'makes shit move' comment, in a response to erik, you just said
flash had it's uses. you also mention how you yourself used it to tie
into CF to provide ski maps. que es esta?
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > Using Flash, we built a downloadable desktop
> > client that connects to a ColdFusion-based content
> > management system. With just one double-click,
> > snowboarders and skiers can access current snow
> > report, news and interactive trail map. This app
> > uses Flash-friendly XML to communicate between
> > client and server: [...]
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> no, sales numbers comparisons between flash and non-flash sites isn't the
> final determinant. to your question, i'd respond almost immediately with a
> question of my own: "did you put the same effort into the html version as
> the flash version?" i'd put my pesos on the answer being no. why? because
> every site i've seen that has all-html and all-flash versions have, without
> exception, put more effort into the flash version to the point where the
> html version seems to have been an afterthought, if one is developed at all.
[snip]
> and i have it installed, but decide on a site by site basis when flash gets
> to execute.
Every site, without exception, that you've seen have unequal html/flash
versions in your opinion, but you use flash on a site by site basis? any
examples that we can check out?
.djc.
More information about the thelist
mailing list