Does any one else see the value of having a component that would be a flash component with a fallback non-flash component for those times when it's just a lot lot easier to have an interesting flash interaction but then specify a different interaction if flash unavailable?
Flash is still the easiest way to create a new interaction as a one off I find due to the, at present, limited available interactive presentation components.
Content fallback is a hotly contested subject, but the current opinion is that a component should be available at all sizes and platforms.
The alternative point of view is that components can (optionally) degrade gracefully if the content cannot be displayed. Now this is not currently supported in the Adapt core but it could be introduced by a custom plugin.
we see lots of attempt html5 with flash fallback with mixed results. for video its generally fine but its often that flash is simply the better looking tool and more widely supported when talking about desktop browsers so I can really see the benefit in the short term (1 to 2 years) of having the fallback options reversed
I guess the consideration is what happens on platforms that don't support the flash content? Do those users just miss out on the experience?
Unless your Flash component used an Adapt JSON model, in which case I suppose you could implement an HTML fallback based on the same model, but I can imagine the work required increases significantly if one takes this approach.
What i'm thinking about (not sure how it would be implemented or if even possible without major framework change) is somethinkg like the below
{
"_id":"flash_componentID",
"_parentId":"parentID",
"_type":"component",
"_component":"flash",
"_fallback":true,
"_layout":"full",
"title":"",
"swf": "some.swf",
"fallback":[
"_id":"fallback_componentID",
"_parentId":inherit,
"_type":"component",
"_component":"accordian",
"_layout":"full",
"title":"",
"items": [........]
]
},