WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: HTML vs. PDF - which takes less time and resources?

for

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: May 10, 2013 9:04AM

A few comments...

It's difficult to compare the 2 formats, HTML and PDF, as they are quite different from each other. And with PDFs, you should be doing most of the accessibility work in the source program such as Word, not moving around tags in Acrobat or correcting the reading order. Remediating a PDF is mind-numbing, slow, and tedious.

[AWK] I won't disagree that this is ever true, but remediating PDF is not always as you describe. In some cases it is no more difficult than repairing equivalent HTML documents. Both take work and depending on the level of complexity, it can be tough.

And then there's that wonderful "feature" where all of the PDF's graphics will be dropped at the top of the tag tree when exported from Word. Not sure whether who should be shamed for this, Microsoft or Adobe, but it's a senseless flaw.

[AWK] http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2701086

HTML does give more coding options for certain things, especially with tables. About all you can do in Word/PDF is designate header rows and columns, and of course, construct it correctly.

[AWK] That's all you can do in Word, but in PDF you can define row/column headers, use scope or headers/id, and handle spanned cells.

AWK