[thelist] Flash + forms

[aardvark]

> From: "Aral Balkan" <aral at aralbalkan.com>
>
> > don't get me wrong, i use Flash regularly in projects, but only when
> > appropriate for the task at hand...
>
> Don't get me wrong but from this I understand that you use Flash in
> your projects even though you don't know how to make your movies
> accessible. Perhaps the first thing to do is to learn about the
> technologies that you use "regularly in projects". Uninformed

actually, i use Flash for its best purpose in my projects -- not as
an attempt to replace HTML or other technologies that already have
better penetration, better support, and don't require re-writing a UI
when the browser and the OS already do it for me...

so, no, i don't make forms and other applications with Flash because
that is not the best use of the technology, nor is it the best
choice... i do, however, use Flash to enhance a page with minor
animations, or other bits of interactivity... none of those pages,
however, would suffer in any way if the Flash never loaded (and they
are built to work without that Flash first, anyway)...

to do otherwise, and rely on Flash to make my projects work, would be
a disservice to my users...

so, can 100% of web browsers handle the HTML forms i build?  yes.

can 100% of users handle the Flash movies you build (i'd say that *i*
build, but you've already decided i'm underqualified)?  no.

and that's through no fault of yours even if you are doing your
damnedest to take advantage of all the hooks introduced in MX...

you've already admitted to only a 92% market penetration... and even
for Flash 6, Macromedia's own numbers (see earlier post) suggest a
number *much* lower than that...

you are cutting out 8% of users, at least... and that doesn't even
account for alternative browsers (see other post)...

so, while i *do*, in fact, know how to make my movies accessible
(i've spent a good deal of time researching and testing the stuff
introduced in MX), using Flash when i need to be WAI and 508
compliant would be a bad decision on my part...

> developers are mostly to blame for the reputation that Flash has, not
> the technology itself. Creating tabindices in Flash takes a couple of
> lines of code and isn't rocket-science.

i agree with that... well, to a point... Macromedia wasn't as
concerned about accessibility when they first released it, but the
concept was still new to them in that context... but yes, bad Flash
developers have given it a bad name, just as bad JS or HTML
developers have done the same for those technologies...

> > if you rely on the
> > user having Flash 5 installed in order to utilize accessibility
> > features, then you now have to struggle with ensuring they have the
> > proper version of Flash...
>
> Since over 90% of users have Flash 5 and above, you can safely develop
> for this audience. New versions of Flash are backwards compatible with

but i don't want to develop for *this* audience, i want to develop
for everyone... i'm not happy leaving ~10% of the web out in the
cold... i don't do it to the ~8% of colorblind users, or the ~10%
without JS enabled/support... so why do the same to the non-Flash
users?

> previous versions which means that if you develop for Flash 5, you
> don't have to make sure that users have the Flash 5 player, anything
> from Flash 5 upwards will work. For all intents and purposes you can
> pretty much ignore Flash 4 and down from now. This isn't anything new,
> there comes a time when you don't have to support old technologies

who makes that decision?  you or the users?

> (eg. try loading up Netscape.com with Netscape 3 and see what
> happens!)

actually, that's an example of bad HTML developers... there's no
reason the site *shouldn't* work in NN3 (and yes, i do have NN3
installed)...

> I don't. In fact, much of what I do as a consultant involves setting
> up usability studies and evaluating technologies for my clients. As a
> designer and developer, I admit to having a soft-spot for Flash but I
> am usually the first to point out to a client instances where they can
> be better served by other technologies, even if they had originally
> wanted "something in Flash" (yes, HTML has its place too!)

then you should understand my point... trying to do web-based forms
in Flash is rarely a good idea, and given its lack of compliance with
WAI and 508 rules, it's probably usually a bad idea...

> It does get me angry, however, when people who don't know enough about
> Flash to make usable applications then turn around and join the choir
> in blaming the technology when others put in the time and effort to
> make sure that their applications usable and accessible (time saved
> not bitching about the technology helps, of course!)

i agree... i also get frustrated when people who don't know enough
about HTML to make usable applications turn around and try to shun it
with other technologies or hacks when others put the time and effort
into not just making their apps usable and accessible, but also
trying to educate others with writing and pontificating...

you should note, however, that i am not pointing my finger at you,
but instead the same people we agree have given Flash a bad name...

so, would you consider writing up a tutorial on how Flash developers
can access those accessibility features? we don't have enough Flash
articles on the site, IMO, let alone pro-Flash articles...

--
Read the evolt.org case study
Usability: The Site Speaks for Itself
http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1904151035/evoltorg02-20
ISBN: 1904151035