WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Rich Text Format (RTF) format and accessibility?


From: Kornbrot, Diana
Date: Sep 28, 2012 2:14AM

If one has word, then accessibility may be improved if one first saves as .docx, check that headings and so on are indeed marked as heading and only then save as pdf. As many have noted it won'y be ideal bt will probably be better tna raw rtf.
I also note that when I tried to upload an rtf file to my website, it was rejected for security reasons. This is another reason for saving as .docx before trying to interpret. No idea why rtf is less secure than .docx which can contian macros


On 27/09/2012 19:31, "Peter Krantz" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:


The Rich Text Format (RTF) is common in many old applications as an
output format when generating documents from e.g. a server
application. I briefly glanced through the RTF specification and tried
to understand how semantics can be expressed.

What is the current consensus of RTF with regards to accessibility?
The lack of many semantic elements compared to HTML seem to make it
difficult to provide information for assistive tools?


Emeritus Professor Diana Kornbrot
web: http://dianakornbrot.wordpress.com/
Department of Psychology
School of Life and Medical Sciences
University of Hertfordshire
College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK
voice: +44 (0) 170 728 4626
fax: +44 (0) 170 728 5073
19 Elmhurst Avenue
London N2 0LT, UK
voice: +44 (0) 208 444 2081
mobile: +44 (0) 740 318 1612
fax: +44 (0) 870 706 1445