On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Ed Murphy wrote: >> Why should a link to an external web page that requires Flash Player >> to view be acceptable? > > How many people have reasonable access to Flash Player these days? If > it's missing or disabled on their usual machine, then does the page > clearly indicate what it requires?
There's also the issue of the paper trail. Anything appearing in the public forum in text, base-64, or any other format is part of public record and on multiple players' computers (accessibility of translator aside). Anything behind links (text, flash, anything else) may be changed with no record left behind. Maybe the standard should be that *nothing* that requires following such a link to get the information be considered a "public posting" of that information. I think the penultimate paragraph of R478 would support this interpretation of public, I regret not thinking of this in my original judgement. -Goethe
