- Mpeg multimedia madness
- Posted by Del on February 21st, 2006
"Andy Mabbett" <usenet200309@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote in message
news:ZO+Lzvonkk+DFwE$@pigsonthewing.org.uk...
(
That is something I've been meaning to touch-up, thanks for the reminder.
Oh- and Spartanicus, thanks for that Object code. I'll be on the case soon
as I get some legal mpeg.
|)e|_
- Posted by Stevie D on February 21st, 2006
Spartanicus wrote:
Opera 9b doesn't support it fully - when I tried looking at the Google
Code site, it displayed the graphs fine, but with no text on them -
which made them kind of useless.
--
Stevie D
\\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the
\\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________
- Posted by Spartanicus on February 21st, 2006
Stevie D <stevie@sjd117.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
SVG supports various "profiles" <http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/>, Opera
8 supports SVG Tiny, Opera 9 will support SVG Basic. Mozilla strives to
implement SVG Full. The wisdom of Mozilla's decision to attempt SVG Full
is questionable to say the least given that SVG Full is a pig to
implement and requires very significant client resources (note that SVG
support is enabled by default in recent desktop versions of Firefox
browsers).
Opera has made the more sensible choice by implementing SVG Tiny and SVG
Basic respectively.
That said, SVG is a largely useless technology, unfortunately many myths
exist in people's minds on the usefulness of SVG. In the real world it
has very few valid usages. Native support on desktop browsers makes
therefore little sense. Opera's native support is mainly aimed at the
mobile market, there SVG may serve some useful purpose.
Google's recent usage of SVG is an example of using a technology merely
for the sake of using it, it serves no useful purpose. The fact that
their SVG code uses elements from the SVG Full profile demonstrates that
their content wasn't meant to be accessible, they were merely goofing
off.
--
Spartanicus
- Posted by :::Jerry:::: on February 21st, 2006
"Del" <del@smashinguitars.com> wrote in message
news:dtf0tn$5nj$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Just ignore the 'Jobs Worth' idiot...
- Posted by Andy Mabbett on February 21st, 2006
In message <43fb27d0$0$48041$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreen ews.net>,
":::Jerry::::" <me@privacy.INVALID> signs himself
Don't be so hard on yourself.
--
Andy Mabbett
Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
- Posted by :::Jerry:::: on February 21st, 2006
"Andy Mabbett" <usenet200309@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote in message
news:qfNXHTrro1+DFwSH@pigsonthewing.org.uk...
[ re accessibility and 'Flash' media files ]
<snip>
Stop talking about yourself!
I understood that Flash now has accessibility aids, if so there would
be no more of a problem using Flash than any other 'image',
surely?...
- Posted by Stevie D on February 21st, 2006
:::Jerry:::: wrote:
Flash, like PDF, does have some accessibility features for those that
have obtained and installed the relevant software. However, for these
aids to work, it does require that the author of the website has put
effort into making them accessible. Expecting it to just work is like
expecting a screen reader to figure out your site when you've posted
every page as a 1024×768 pixel GIF image.
--
Stevie D
\\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the
\\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________
- Posted by :::Jerry:::: on February 21st, 2006
"Stevie D" <stevie@sjd117.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:334nv1h5bs70m8jokdks2ev7vqskbu40uq@4ax.com...
Or just not bothered with alt descriptions whilst your file names are
arbitrary in the extreme. IOW, any accessibility aid requires the
author to use them correctly - crap in = crap out...
- Posted by Andy Mabbett on February 21st, 2006
In message <43fb8123$0$78136$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreen ews.net>,
":::Jerry::::" <me@privacy.INVALID> writes
No, I was discussing his usenet "sig" and his image of a telephone
number. You appear to be confused.
--
Andy Mabbett
Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
- Posted by :::Jerry:::: on February 22nd, 2006
"Andy Mabbett" <usenet200309@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote in message
news:OKOOynBmh6+DFwHR@pigsonthewing.org.uk...
So you admit to trolling then?...
Sig' lines are personal and can contain anything, even off topic
remarks (as you well know), they don't need to be 'accessible' at
all - even to those who don't use accessibility aids!
