WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: PDF on websites

for

From: David Ashleydale
Date: Jun 24, 2013 4:30PM

I would also like to add that even accessible PDFs can create usability
challenges on web sites. I usually encourage people to use HTML for content
that is meant to be read on a computer, mostly because the interfaces are
just different. Back buttons work differently, the magnification often
needs to be fussed with, sometimes they open within the browser, sometime
outside the browser, etc. They are just different. And for non computer
savvy individuals, the differences can be daunting.

Of course, you may not have the opportunity to convert your PDFs into HTML
pages, but I always advise people to consider it at least.

Thanks,
David


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Len Burns < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> One thing needs to be said here. While I agree on the 508 analysis,
> usability can be quite a different matter where a PDF form may be involved.
> This is not due to the standards, it is because of the variability in how
> screen readers on different platforms respond to them. If a user relies
> upon a Linux based OS, or VoiceOver on the Mac, the document may be quite
> readable, but completing a form would be quite a different matter. If one
> is using a current version of Jaws, the experience can be smooth.
>
> -Len
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Krack,
> Joseph@DOR
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 1:05 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF on websites
>
> Gabriel,
>
> Thank you for the response.
>
> The PDF's in question are indeed accessible (tested by both machine and
> AT using individuals - not to mention being created by me :) ). The
> person is basically just trying to pick a fight and while I was pretty
> sure of the answer, I really wanted to get more opinions from the
> experts in this blog. Prior to responding to the latest email from this
> person.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of McMorland,
> Gabriel
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 12:14 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF on websites
>
> I'm curious about the accessibility of the existing PDFs on your site.
> Have you reviewed a sample of them to ensure that they are actually
> accessible? Also, what challenges or barriers were found by the person
> that wants HTML versions of the PDF content?
>
> This is just a hunch, but have you reviewed a sample of your agency's
> PDFs to verify that all data tables are properly tagged and formatted
> for screen reader navigation?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Krack,
> Joseph@DOR
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 7:34 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF on websites
>
> Thanks Bevi,
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Chagnon |
> PubCom
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 3:01 PM
> To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF on websites
>
> The current Section 508 regulations are pretty weak; they date back to
> 2000.
> We're awaiting the "refresh" that will tighten up and expand coverage,
> remove the gray areas of what's covered and what isn't.
>
> What makes your question difficult is that every agency has come up with
> their own policy. Some versions are good, others aren't. Some are
> out-of-date. Depends upon the agency.
>
> Here's the Access Board's current standards, effective December 21,
> 2000.
> http://access-board.gov/sec508/standards.htm
>
> Subpart A General, Section 1194.1 Purpose.
> "Section 508 requires that when Federal agencies develop, procure,
> maintain, or use electronic and information technology, Federal
> employees with disabilities have access to and use of information and
> data that is comparable to the access and use by Federal employees who
> are not individuals with disabilities, unless an undue burden would be
> imposed on the agency." [next sentence includes the general public]
>
> I think the key words are "have access and use of information and data
> that is comparable."
> If the PDF is truly accessible, then it meets this requirement. Nothing
> more needs to be done.
> If the other hand, the PDF wasn't accessible (and therefore not
> providing comparable access and use of the information), then alternate
> accessible versions would be needed.
>
> From a workflow/process viewpoint, it becomes a nightmare to maintain a
> website, file server, or content management system with multiple
> versions of a document: one gets updated but the others don't and you
> now have a data mess on your hands.
>
> The ideal is to have one version of your data that is kept up-to-date
> and is fully accessible. There's nothing preventing a PDF from meeting
> that requirement.
>
> My two cents...
> -Bevi Chagnon
> - - -
> www.PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
> Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
> Accessibility.
> New Sec. 508 Workshop & EPUBs Tour in 2013 - www.Workshop.Pubcom.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Krack,
> Joseph@DOR
>
> I work for a State agency that is mandated to follow Section 508 and ADA
> regulations and standards regarding websites and documents. A question
> arose about posting documents to our websites. Right now we have
> accessible PDF's on the site, but someone is insisting that we also have
> an HTML or Rich Text version of each of these documents by law. Does
> anyone have any familiarity with this? If it is required is there a
> section of either or these acts that spell this out?
>
> Thanks,
> Joe Krack
>
> > > messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
>
> > > messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
>
> > > >
> > > >