WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

PDF Accessibility Checker (PAC) vs. Adobe Acrobat Pro XI full check

for

From: Liko, Todd
Date: Mar 13, 2014 6:13AM

Hello all.

I use both tools to assess a PDF document for accessibility. Both tools provide reports and are more often than not, quite different from each other. For example, PAC always flags borders, table borders, etc... as untagged content, whereas, Acrobat full check does not. Adobe full check always flags table irregularity even when colspan or rowspan are properly set.

Neither tool flags if the <Reference> tag is properly used for links referencing content within the document, but that makes sense as the automated check cannot determine if the link in internal or external. I always add it because it is part of the ISO Standard.

I also realize the PAC tool assesses against the Matterhorn Protocol which is not required under WCAG 2.0, therefore returns many errors that probably can be overlooked. I prefer to address the errors, however, in order to be proactive.

I guess my question is should I care that the table borders are untagged, that the <Reference> tag or <Label> tag is not being used? Obviously addressing all of these items requires more effort and time and I am getting some pushback/questions as to why it takes so my time to make a PDF document accessible.

There are also suggestions that we simply convert all PDF documents to HTML 5, in order to meet the Standard on Mobile Devices.

Any thoughts or feedback would be much appreciated.

_______
Todd Liko
Communications Advisor | Conseiller en communications
Web Services | Services Web
Communications and Marketing | Communications et Marketing
427 Avenue Laurier Avenue West (AEAD), Ottawa ON K1A 0N5
427 Avenue Laurier Ouest (AEAD), Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0N5
e-mail / courriel: <EMAIL REMOVED> <mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> >
telephone / téléphone: (613) 949-9425 | fax / télécopieur: (613) 949-2386
Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada