WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: link to word documents

for

From: Holly Marie
Date: Jan 7, 2003 6:00AM

From: "Kynn Bartlett"


>
> On Monday, January 6, 2003, at 02:27 PM, Susan wrote:
> > They have a list of links to get further information about their
> > products but when the links are followed all this information is in
> > word
> > documents. Apart from the obvious possibility of incompatibility with
> > other word processors or even other versions of word are there any
> > accessibility issues with this arrangement.
>
> I agree with what Paul Bohman had to say in another reply. I will add
> that I believe
> it is more useful to provide documents in HTML and PDF instead of
> providing them in
> HTML and Word. If you are providing a document in a "formatted"
> version, such as
> Word or PDF, it is better practice to use PDF.

I disagree about PDF being a better pratice, though I do believe offering
the HTML alternative is preferred in all choices.
PDF also take longer to download. The larger or more complex this file is,
the longer it will take to download. On the other hand multipaged HTML
downloads just that page at a time, not the whole chunk. Therefor if a user
is online looking for a single topic in a User Manual or other such
document, if it is in that PDF document, they may have to download the Whole
200+ pages or more[sometimes less], in order to retrieve that information.
This is not acceptable in ease of access. [I may go out on a limb, but I
highly doubt these online PDF manuals have been converted over in accessible
ways.]

For the average user, PDF is not User Friendly, full page readability means
less content is seen and more manipulation of the pages and between pages is
needed. IT is highly difficult for even average users to read a PDF document
online. Requiring a user to print these documents for reading is rather bad
design for the user, and not the most accessible solution for the low or
non visual users.

And how good are these conversions overall? Are they acceptable and easier
to follow or use as an HTML page.

Personally, if PDF is offered on any site I might put together: HTML and
Text will probably be the added choices and then the only reason to really
offer the PDF is for a better printable solution. Other accessibility issues
can be better met with HTML and even text files.

> The advantages of PDF are:
>
> * If made correctly, they support structural encoding readable by newer
> versions of
> the Adobe reader.

I wonder what percentage of PDF's out there are made correctly? How many
people are aware of how to make these correctly? And I wonder about the ease
in making these documents more accessible?
If someone does not have Acrobat Reader they will need to download and
install one. This process will require a visit to Adobe, forms, and then
download.

PDF is a print document in most cases. Accessibility is then linked to a
user who has technology to Scan these documents[though OCR may not scan
these perfectly well or translate the information well when converted]

> * The Acrobat PDF reader is available for free on nearly every platform.

Web browsers are the same. Free for every platform on the web.
Flash may be more accessible to those with cognitive and motor challenges,
where PDF falls short. Manipulating and scrolling pages in PDF format can be
a challenge. Quite often PDFs I encounter are at less than 100% of the
printable text to fit to web pages and need to be enlarged for average
optimal readability. IF a person needs to enlarge these even more for visual
perception challenges, these documents become an added challenge to
manipulate between lines, paragraphs, pages, and keeping a smooth reading
flow is difficult.

The PDF GUI is not as intuitive as a web page might be. A simple search and
find command for words or text from the keyboard is not quite as easy.

The lack of smoother scrolling in a PDF is an accessibility challenge for
those with motor differences, and those not familiar with the PDF interface.

> * PDF is often a read-only format (although not exclusively so) and is
> thus better for distribution than Word, which is designed to be editable
easily.

I am trying to understand where this makes it better for the end user?
I would think that easy edit follows better guidelines for Accessibility and
Tools or Editing Applications. Just how easy is it for someone to edit or
make a PDF document accessible? Are these cues and instructions easy to find
and understand? Is the authoring or editing software easy to use when making
accessible read only documents?


> * Word files can often contain unintentional information which you
> don't wish to reveal, because Word stores additional information with each
file.
> For example, deleted text or information about your computer system is
often
> stored in a Word file, and you may not want to release that information.

This sounds like more of an issue from the standpoint of the author of the
document. How is this an accessibility issue for the end user?
Is this a case where the authoring person needs to know what is in their
Word document going out?

> * Word files can be used to spread destructive macro viruses, while
> that danger does not exist in PDF.

Web browsers, email, Flash, and other media delivery can spread viruses,
though I do agree that macros are possible in word documents. HTML pages can
spread web viruses, too. Pop up advertising, too.


> This is _not_ to say that you should use PDF exclusively; you should
> offer an HTML version as well.

Much better solution.

However, if you have a choice as to which formats to
> use, I prefer
> them in this order:
>
> 1. HTML
> 2. PDF
> 3. Word

PDF was actually meant to be a printed format, not a readable format online.
Its optimal use online is not as high as it could be.
Scrolling pages remains a challenge for those with disabilities and average
users alike.
Care needs to be taken if this document is geared for web as well as print,
and it might be nice if most opened up with text or viewability at 100% for
the starting point.
Care needs to be taken to make sure that these PDF documents are also
accessible.[this can be a challenge, too.]
Optimal navigation is important on lengthy or technical pieces, such as:
manuals, instructions, reports, etc. [inside document linking?]
Are Links included for next and back at the bottoms of each page? [the PDF
page navigation arrows are very diffucult for many]
Is there an index and a quick access to topics and subtopics available?
[again links help here, including links in the context]

Most of the PDFs I see do not seem more accessible and are more difficult to
manipulate than a web page.


Downloadable [Free] courseware for Instructors and Students [available in
5.4mb zip files]
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/access_info.html#training

Creating Accessible PDF documents
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/access_booklet.html


holly




----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/