WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

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

for

From: Shawn Henry (uiAccess projects)
Date: Jul 12, 2013 4:02AM

(Olaf and I had a very congenial, constructive exchange off-list, which informed some of my comments below.)

First and foremost, I whole-heartedly agree that my text did not accurately distinguish between PDF files and the "PDF format", and this is an important distinction. I have edited the information on http://www.tader.info to reflect this distinction. I will be more careful of this.

To clarify here: I am stating only that PDF files are not accessible today because of the lack of text customization functionality in PDF Reader and other viewers. I do not mean to make any statement about the "PDF format itself". (I do not know enough about the technical aspects of the format -- although I do wonder if there may be fundamental issues with the format given the limitations of all viewers, for example, not to reflow PDF files with forms.)

My goal is to encourage Adobe Reader, other PDF viewers, and "user agents" for other technologies/formats (including web browsers for HTML) to provide sufficient text customization functionality that is easy for people to use. I do not want to banish PDF altogether. The reason I am emphasizing that PDF files are not currently accessible is that it is not well understood, even among PDF experts and accessibility specialists. My purpose is to educate accessibility advocates and content providers on the current limitations of PDF viewers in order to motivate them to actively encourage improvements in Adobe Reader. (Yes, there are other viewers, but ideally the mainstream one supports accessibility.) If people do not understand there is a problem, they won't know to encourage it to be fixed.

I sincerely apologize that my comments came across to some as not respecting the work to improve PDF accessibility, especially for screen reader users. I do appreciate and acknowledge all that work! In fact, that is why I have been quiet about this issue for so long. I've been bugging Adobe accessibility manager Andrew Kirkpatrick, and before him Bob Regan, about it for several years. I said almost nothing publicly until last year because they were making improvements in accessibility.

The issue now is that people are not speaking up enough about users' needs to customize text display. People with low vision, dyslexia, and related conditions that impact reading are a large user group –larger than people who are blind-, we just don't have coordinated advocacy. I don't know specific statistics on how many people need to customize text, however, these stats provide some insight: An estimated 15–20% of the population has symptoms of dyslexia, and 246 million have low vision (compared to 39 million who are blind) [references at <http://www.tader.info/understanding.html#refstats>;] -- and these numbers are increasing due to age-related impairments. Text customization is not just nice-to-have for a few; it is a requirement for a significant number of people. Please see <http://www.tader.info/baddisplay.html>; for enlightening comments and survey data.

I have another request, particularly to those ingrained in PDF: Would you consider thinking differently about "documents" and instead think of access to information?
I agree that PDF is the best format in many cases *for printing specifically-designed information*. However, when you want to provide information that is accessible to most people, perhaps it needs to be offered in another format...


Replies on specific points are below, preceded with "SLH".

On 7/9/2013 10:51 AM, Duff Johnson wrote:
...
>> The problem is that PDF is currently *not sufficiently accessible*
>> to many people with low vision, dyslexia, and related conditions
>> and situations that impact reading - because Adobe Reader and other
>> PDF viewers lack sufficient text customization functionality.
>
> 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.

SLH: Sorry I wasn't clear. I mean that even well-tagged PDF files designed well for accessibility are currently not sufficiently accessible to many people with low vision, dyslexia, and related conditions that impact reading - because Adobe Reader and other PDF viewers lack sufficient text customization functionality.

...

> You would achieve far more, I think, by making statements similar to
> the following:
>
> "PDF files can only be considered fully accessible in every possible
> use-case when full TAdER text management is available."

SLH: Point taken -- however, I would not say that any files (PDF or HTML or Word processing files) can be "fully accessible in every possible use-case" (note WCAG's disclaimer: "...even content that conforms at the highest level (AAA) will not be accessible to individuals with all types, degrees,..."). I agree that:
PDF files can only be considered accessible to some people with low vision, dyslexia, and related conditions that impact reading when the PDF viewer they use provides sufficient text customization. (but currently none are available)

...

>> Unfortunately, "tagged PDF" started getting called "accessible PDF"
>> -- that is inaccurate and a harmful misnomer.
>
> Let's be completely clear on this.
>
> PDF that conforms with PDF/UA-1 (ISO 14289-1) is accessible, period.
> Whether it is accessibility-supported for any given need is *another
> matter* - a question for implementers, but assuredly not in question
> with respect to the file format.

SLH: Right, I need to distinguish between files and format. Not talking about the format, but about the real world user situation today: *Even PDF files that conform with PDF/UA-1 (ISO 14289-1) are not currently accessible* to some people with low vision, dyslexia, and related conditions that impact reading - because PDF viewers lack sufficient text customization functionality.

...

> Do you really want to suggest that PDF is inaccessible now but can
> "become accessible" when (for example (VIP Reader adds the ability to
> print? ...

SLH: Yes, exactly! – with the clarification of files, not format: PDF files are inaccessible now, but can become accessible to most people when PDF viewers provide sufficient text customization.
(which is more than the ability to print <http://www.tader.info/display.html>;)

(side note: I updated the information on VIP PDF-Reader to be more specific about which aspects of text customization it supports and which it does not yet -- and to praise their work and openness to improvements. <http://www.tader.info/support.html#vipreader>;)
(tangent: VIP PDF-Reader provides excellent line, word, and character spacing settings – you can set them to any point, instead of just selecting from a limited number of pre-defined points. My problem is that I haven't figured out how to say that succinctly in <http://www.tader.info/support.html#vipreader>;. If you have suggestions for a term to express it, I'd really appreciate the help. :)

...

---

SLH: It seems that my lack of distinction between files and format was the source of disagreements. I'm sorry! I'm optimistic that with these clarifications we're now more aligned to work together on making information more accessible to all!

Sincerely,
~Shawn



<http://www.uiaccess.com/profile.html>;
Note: Please be careful in referencing the information on the tader.info website and e-mails from uiAccess.com as from the individual Shawn, not her employer.