WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

RE: adobe 6.0 accessibility

for

From: Zwack, Melanie
Date: Oct 10, 2003 11:10AM


I've been using Acrobat 6.0 Professional version and had worked a lot with
Acrobat 5.0 (actually Acrobat 5.0.5).

Anything developed correctly in Microsoft Office 2000 (Word, Excel,
PowerPoint) converts wonderfully and only required the addition of
alternative text tags for graphic images. Apparently, in the Acrobat 6.0
Professional overview Adobe states that Microsoft Office 2000, Microsoft
Office XP, FrameMaker 7.0, InDesign CS, and PageMaker 7.0 have been
specially developed to work with and convert to accessible PDF format very
nicely. There are probably some development guidelines for preparing the
document as there are for Office 2000 which requires styles be implemented
throughout the document, and other development guidelines.

From my experience, Quark documents sometimes convert well, and other times
doesn't convert that well. In very graphic layouts, I've had funny stuff
happening where the background graphics overlay the front layer of text, and
all kinds of funny stuff. Sometimes, these are fixable, sometimes not. But,
I ought to qualify the factor that Quark documents in my department are
clearly not always developed in a correct styles and structural manner as is
suggested in order for documents to convert well to accessible PDF format.

I've had a lot of luck with WordPerfect documents converting very nicely to
accessible PDF format.

For Legacy PDFs ( those PDFs where there is no original document format to
go back to and correct/enhance then reconvert back to PDF format) sometimes
work fine and other times don't. If it's too bad, sometimes conversion to
accessible PDF format may not even be possible. There are some minor work
arounds such as placing text in figure or shape tags that have been
implemented on the page by the make accessible (Add tags to document)
function. In the worst case scenarios either convert to HTML or pull the
text out back into a software layout program such as Word 2000 and just
begin the process from scratch if really intent on accessible PDF format
(ASCII/HTML not an option).

One drawback that I've discovered is that the file size when converted to
accessible PDF format increases by at least a third in most/many cases which
can be problematic especially when the PDF has a larger size to begin with.

Even in Acrobat 6.0 Professional version I have not been able to manually
add tags. For some reason, this is not possible. This was a known problem in
Acrobat 5.0, and seems to continue to be a problem in Acrobat 6.0
Professional (at least for me it does) . ******Questions: What experiences
have any other people had with this? How are people adding tags manually if
not already added by the Add Tags to Document (Make Accessible
function)?*******

I've noticed the Add Tags to Document (Make Accessible function) has
improved the output in Acrobat 6.0 Professional in comparison to Acrobat
5.0. Sometimes, a document that might not have worked in Acrobat 5.0 is
converting nicely in Acrobat 6.0 Professional to accessible PDF format.

Another factor, is that the interface to clean up the PDF is much nicer and
easier to use in Acrobat 6.0 Professional in comparison to Acrobat 5.0.

-- Melanie


-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Dick [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 11:55 AM
To: <EMAIL REMOVED> ; <EMAIL REMOVED>
Subject: Re: adobe 6.0 accessibility


Jeb and all.

As a low vision user, I have found PDF the worst product for accessibility
out there. The problem is simple. The main purpose for PDF is to create
exact images of printed pages. Well, print never worked for any visually
impaired people. So here we have an example of brilliant mathematics and
engineering spent on giving us an electronic version of something that never
worked.

Most low vision users, expecially those between 20/80 and 20/200 prefer,
large print, well spaced output that has been reformatted to fit the
available screen space. Most word processors do this extremely well. The
problem with PDF is that it does not enlarge intelligently. You cannot
control the spacing between lines. It doesn't port well into any accessible
visual interface.

Any product that enlarges without word wrapping is not accessible to low
vision users.

There is a large faculty that is assumed by many if not most in the
accessiblity business. That is that one size fits all. Audio output is not
the best or even the reasonable accommodation for people who can see, but
not a lot. The fact that PDF, or any format can be ported to screen readers
does not make it accessible. Any interface that cannot be enlarge by a
factor of 4 intelligently, is not really accessible. Also, without user
control of color, most products are marginal.

Poorly formated PDF is useless. Well formatted PDF is difficult to use, but
marginally possible. I usually spend about 10 minutes per page to obtain a
good readible document.

This year befor my term as Academic Senate Chair ends I hope to enact a
complete ban of PDF use on my campus. Next, I will try to extend it to the
entire CSU System.

Wish me luck,

Wayne Dick
Chair Academic Senate
Professor Computer Engineering and Computer Science
CSU Long Beach



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/