E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 5 (In chronological order)

From: Bevi Chagnon
Date: Sat, Jul 30 2011 3:45PM
Subject: Actual Text attribute
No previous message | Next message →

That's Actual text, not Alt-text.

I'm wondering how screen reader users and their AT handle this feature in
PDFs. I haven't yet seen Actual Text used or read in the real world.

From Adobe's Help for InDesign CS 5.5:

"PDF also supports actual text, in addition to Alt text. Actual text can be
applied to graphic elements that visually look like text. For example, a
scanned TIFF image. Actual text is used to represent words that were
converted to artwork. Actual text is only applicable for tagged PDFs."

My question: if Actual Text attributes are added to text-like graphics in
PDFs, are they automatically read by default by screen readers? Or do AT
users have to manually read them? Do they even know that the attribute is
there for them to read?

-- Bevi Chagnon



----

Bevi Chagnon | = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

PubCom - Trainers, consultants, designers, and developers

Print | Web | Acrobat | XML | Section 508

----

Classes: www.PubCom.com/classes

Bevi's Blog: www.pubcom.com/blog

----

*** It's our 30th Year! ***

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Sat, Jul 30 2011 5:06PM
Subject: Re: Actual Text attribute
← Previous message | Next message →

Actual Text should not be used for a page or pages of scanned text. The intent is that it is used for images of text...small pieces of text.

One issue is that adaptive technology has buffers and each adaptive technology has a different size buffer.

I've experienced PDF documents with so much content in an Alt or Actual Text attribute that the documents could not be opened while the AT was running and since AT must be running when an application/document is open, this renders the PDF inaccessible.

Theoretically, Actual Text is treated by the AT as if it were text and not an "alternate for text" or an image.

If you are working in InDesign, it is always better to work with text and not images of text. Using text let's you add the appropriate structure such as headings, lists and tables..which you can't do in either Alt or Actual Text.

Scanned images also create other accessibility problems if you have to reduce the size of the PDF...Whether it is text or images.

Cheers, Karen

Out of Office, Sent from my iPad

On 2011-07-30, at 5:44 PM, "Bevi Chagnon" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> That's Actual text, not Alt-text.
>
> I'm wondering how screen reader users and their AT handle this feature in
> PDFs. I haven't yet seen Actual Text used or read in the real world.
>
> From Adobe's Help for InDesign CS 5.5:
>
> "PDF also supports actual text, in addition to Alt text. Actual text can be
> applied to graphic elements that visually look like text. For example, a
> scanned TIFF image. Actual text is used to represent words that were
> converted to artwork. Actual text is only applicable for tagged PDFs."
>
> My question: if Actual Text attributes are added to text-like graphics in
> PDFs, are they automatically read by default by screen readers? Or do AT
> users have to manually read them? Do they even know that the attribute is
> there for them to read?
>
> -- Bevi Chagnon
>
>
>
> ----
>
> Bevi Chagnon | = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
> PubCom - Trainers, consultants, designers, and developers
>
> Print | Web | Acrobat | XML | Section 508
>
> ----
>
> Classes: www.PubCom.com/classes
>
> Bevi's Blog: www.pubcom.com/blog
>
> ----
>
> *** It's our 30th Year! ***
>
>
>
>
>
>

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Sat, Jul 30 2011 5:30PM
Subject: Re: Actual Text attribute
← Previous message | Next message →

Sorry, forgot to answer your question.

Actual text is theoretically read in a more natural way as opposed to At Text. I don't come across it much, not a lot of people know about the Actual Text attribute.

By reading the content in a more natural way I mean with natural pauses and more "integrated" into the document. I'll test it again tomorrow to give you more information.

Cheers, Karen

Out of Office, Sent from my iPad

On 2011-07-30, at 5:44 PM, "Bevi Chagnon" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Sat, Jul 30 2011 8:42PM
Subject: Re: Actual Text attribute
← Previous message | Next message →

The primary distinction is that when a figure has actual text that figure isn't reported as a figure to the accessibility API, so the assistive technology won't read it as a figure. When alternative text is used, it is reported as a figure so a screen reader will say "graphic" or similar to indicate the role. If you use both, it is regarded as a figure.

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe Systems

= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://twitter.com/awkawk
http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Sun, Jul 31 2011 7:00AM
Subject: Re: Actual Text attribute
← Previous message | No next message

I just did a test with JAWS 12 and a paragraph of text I saved as a PNG then
inserted it into a document. I added the Actual Text attribute and JAWS IS
reporting it as a graphic. My JAWS verbosity setting is for labeled graphics
only although it often doesn't respect that setting in operating system
dialogs. I haven't had it override my graphics setting in an application but
it seems to do so in PDF...or at least this sample document.

Am using Acrobat 9x and at some point in previous versions of JAWS there was
the distinction of not hearing "graphic" before Actual text using JAWS so
this is an AT "issue" rather than an implementation of the Actual text
Attribute issue.

For the sample document I created which has one image of text, two
paragraphs of text and one photo with Alt Text, for some reason the
identification of "graphic 70" is being added randomly in the document. I've
checked the Tags Tree and there are only two images so am not sure where
JAWS is finding this extra graphic...maybe wishful thinking on its
part...and another reason to take testing with AT into perspective. :-)

Will try it in Acrobat X on my other machine on Tuesday/Monday is a holiday
here....and worked through this because, well, curiosity and the cat.....

Andrew is right in that Actual Text should be identified without the
"graphic" identifier.

Cheers, Karen