WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: PDF on websites + PDF is *not* accessible

for

From: Ryan E. Benson
Date: Jul 10, 2013 11:31PM

> Acrobat - proprietary application from Adobe Systems
> PDF - open file-format

However, if you grab a copy of the PDF Standard, at least my copy, has the
following (c) Adobe Systems. So, if the format was truly open wouldn't ISO,
AIIM, PDF Association own it, not the proprietary company? Seems backwards
to me.

--
Ryan E. Benson


On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Duff Johnson < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> On Jul 9, 2013, at 6:13 PM, "Ryan E. Benson" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
>
> > Duff said:
> > First, this statement is equally true for plenty of implementations of
> HTML
> > / CSS / JavaScript technology, various combinations of which produce
> > results that defeat today's AT technologies. It's hardly a "PDF problem"
> -
> > calling out PDF specifically in this case is misleading.
> >
> > Duff this is incorrect. I can open up most browsers and define a user
> > stylesheet which allows me to do about anything I wish provided that I
> > understand CSS. Either by default, or via plugins, I can define a custom
> > stylesheet for a specific site. For example, in Firefox I have an outline
> > which makes it clear where the focus is. Of course there are ways
> > developers can get around my stylesheet.
>
> …and of course, there are ways in which PDF authors can get around making
> PDF files that can be effectively reused in the AT of choice as well!
>
> But my point is that while it's quite horrendously easy to achieve
> inaccessible PDF that is emphatically not the same as "PDF is inaccessible."
>
> > For example the Gmail UI likes to
> > use spans/divs instead of whatever a semantically appropriate tag would
> be.
> > In Acrobat, I can only choose from a few back/foreground colors.
>
>
> Acrobat - proprietary application from Adobe Systems
> PDF - open file-format
>
> There's a difference!
>
> My point is that a properly tagged PDF can - for these purposes - "become"
> an HTML file, and thus becomes susceptible to the sorts of enhancements you
> mention. pdfGoHTML demonstrates this fact, and it's free. Of course, it
> requires Acrobat, and doesn't (yet) work with Reader… but that's an
> implementation, not a file-format question.
>
> I'm simply trying to ensure we distinguish between PDF and applications
> which create or process PDF. The distinction is *vital* if one wishes to
> inform and affect software development.
>
> Duff.
> > > >