<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Muggle me!  Accessible  Flash!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/accessible-flash/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/accessible-flash/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:32:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce</title>
		<link>http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/accessible-flash/comment-page-1/#comment-199</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:26:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/index.php/2005/accessible-flash/#comment-199</guid>
		<description>I agree, Pat. But I think that the effort and attention to the Flash accessibility - which has always been a black art - justifies some applause. Too often we as a community delight in  pointing out shortcomings (and you&#039;re right that the plain jane version of the site is a short-coming) and we fail to praise. 

It&#039;s not just the accessibility community, it&#039;s the wider Standards community. Check out all the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/04/22/410963.aspx#411120&quot;&gt;bitching&lt;/a&gt; on &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/04/22/410963.aspx#411140&quot;&gt;the IE blog &lt;/a&gt;, even when Microsoft announce CSS bug fixes and PNG transparency.

Pointing out shortcomings in a constructive way as you do (and I hope I do) is one thing, but occasionally the community can be quite vituperative. Many vendors must feel they&#039;re damned if they do, and damned if they don&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree, Pat. But I think that the effort and attention to the Flash accessibility &#8211; which has always been a black art &#8211; justifies some applause. Too often we as a community delight in  pointing out shortcomings (and you&#8217;re right that the plain jane version of the site is a short-coming) and we fail to praise. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s not just the accessibility community, it&#8217;s the wider Standards community. Check out all the <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/04/22/410963.aspx#411120">bitching</a> on <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/04/22/410963.aspx#411140">the IE blog </a>, even when Microsoft announce CSS bug fixes and PNG transparency.</p>
<p>Pointing out shortcomings in a constructive way as you do (and I hope I do) is one thing, but occasionally the community can be quite vituperative. Many vendors must feel they&#8217;re damned if they do, and damned if they don&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick H. Lauke</title>
		<link>http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/accessible-flash/comment-page-1/#comment-198</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick H. Lauke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:51:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/index.php/2005/accessible-flash/#comment-198</guid>
		<description>it still pains me to see, though, that it&#039;s an &quot;all or nothing&quot; site with regards to the visual flair and design. you can either have the flash, or you get betsie-like plain text...no in-between. would have been nice to maybe just give the non-flash version a nice, clean xhtml/css makeover that, while being more or less static, still conveys the feel and attention to detail of the flash version. ah well, budgets etc probably got in the way...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it still pains me to see, though, that it&#8217;s an &#8220;all or nothing&#8221; site with regards to the visual flair and design. you can either have the flash, or you get betsie-like plain text&#8230;no in-between. would have been nice to maybe just give the non-flash version a nice, clean xhtml/css makeover that, while being more or less static, still conveys the feel and attention to detail of the flash version. ah well, budgets etc probably got in the way&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: goodwitch</title>
		<link>http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/accessible-flash/comment-page-1/#comment-196</link>
		<dc:creator>goodwitch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 00:13:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/index.php/2005/accessible-flash/#comment-196</guid>
		<description>My favorite flash accessible site is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/zoot/eng_sfeature/sf_zoot.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Zoot Suit Culture&lt;/a&gt;  You can see a &lt;a href=&quot;http://weblogs.macromedia.com/accessibility/archives/2005/03/index.cfm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;list of accessible flash sites&lt;/a&gt; by Bob Regan (my hero).

Yum! Yum! Yum!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My favorite flash accessible site is <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/zoot/eng_sfeature/sf_zoot.html" rel="nofollow">Zoot Suit Culture</a>  You can see a <a href="http://weblogs.macromedia.com/accessibility/archives/2005/03/index.cfm" rel="nofollow">list of accessible flash sites</a> by Bob Regan (my hero).</p>
<p>Yum! Yum! Yum!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Layla</title>
		<link>http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/accessible-flash/comment-page-1/#comment-195</link>
		<dc:creator>Layla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:21:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/index.php/2005/accessible-flash/#comment-195</guid>
		<description>VERY Cool site, so creative and unique!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>VERY Cool site, so creative and unique!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

