Sacrificing accessibility for aesthetics IS a very poor m.o., but sIFR IS NOT sacrificing accessibility in any way. Though you seem to be very passionate about the subject, you don't seem to be very knowledgeable. sIFR has been accepted by some of the most stringent accessibility gurus, and would not lessen the experience of a site under any of the circumstances that you mentioned. Although many websites are designed poorly and may pose problems in situations such as those, well designed websites (with or without sIFR) do not. Don't attack a perfectly reasonable and accessible method just because is includes the dreaded flash. And stop hating on the designers!:P
Slashdot Mirror
Sacrificing accessibility for aesthetics IS a very poor m.o., but sIFR IS NOT sacrificing accessibility in any way. Though you seem to be very passionate about the subject, you don't seem to be very knowledgeable. sIFR has been accepted by some of the most stringent accessibility gurus, and would not lessen the experience of a site under any of the circumstances that you mentioned. Although many websites are designed poorly and may pose problems in situations such as those, well designed websites (with or without sIFR) do not. Don't attack a perfectly reasonable and accessible method just because is includes the dreaded flash. And stop hating on the designers! :P