E-mail List Archives

Re: PDF Container tags

for

From: Chagnon | PubCom.com
Date: Sep 28, 2015 8:29PM


Thanks Ryan. You're confirming my opinion.
And thanks for catching <Document> rather than <DOC>. Sometimes I get my various tagging languages/syntax flipped.

But to clarify my earlier question:
Do these various container tags -- <DOCUMENT>, <PART>, <ART>, <SECT>, and <DIV> -- have any affect on screen readers and other AT?

They are the container tags specified in the PDF 2008 standard tag set. In my experience, we haven't noticed any screen readers acknowledging them in a document, nor stumbling over them either.

Do they cause problems for AT?
Do they provide any benefits for AT users?

--Bevi Chagnon

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Ryan E. Benson
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 5:28 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF Container tags

Hi Bevi,

> Are any of these container tags recognized by today's screen
readers and other AT?
To my knowledge there is not way to navigate like you can with ARIA regions at this time.

> Does it matter if the <DOC> tag is there in the PDF tag tree?
DOC isn't a standard tag, so it should be mapped to Document. If not, custom tags are mapped to P if not defined in Acrobat, so the various structures could essentially be ignored. As for having a <Document> it comes down how much of a purist you are. Not having one will not break the document unlike leaving out <html> and <body> in HTML.

--
Ryan E. Benson

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Chagnon | PubCom.com < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> This issue comes up quite frequently in our work.
>
> People have hissy fits about the common container tags that become
> embedded in PDF tag trees when a PDF is made from InDesign, Word, and
> other office software. Everyone has a different take on their purpose,
> meaning, and requirements. We're trying to clarify this issue for a student's work.
>
>
>
> Questions (and links to reference material follows):
>
>
>
> The defined container tags in the Adobe PDF standard are <DOC>,
> <PART>, <ART>, <SECT>, and <DIV>. Their definitions are loosely
> defined in the Acrobat PDF Standards 3200_2008 (see table 333
> beginning on page 583
>
> http://www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/PDF32000_2008.
> pdf ). I say "loosely defined" because the only one that is adequately
> defined is <DOC> which is the root element of the tag structure.
> Everything else falls within it. All the other definitions could be
> debated from now until the cows come home.
>
> 1. Are any of these container tags recognized by today's screen
> readers and other AT? The last time we checked (last spring), they
> were ignored by screen readers and the PDF tags were read
> top-to-bottom down the tag tree regardless of whether there were
> container tags here and there or not. Is this still the case?
>
> 2. Does it matter if the <DOC> tag is there in the PDF tag tree?
>
> 3. From the user's point of view, is there any proposed purpose for
> these container tags, now or in the future?
>
> 4. And what about <SPAN> tags, do they still interfere with screen
> readers and AT?
>
>
>
> NOTE: I know these tags can have some purpose for those who create
> PDFs, but I'm questioning their purpose by AT.
>
>
>
> We couldn't find any references to these container tags when we
> searched the PDF/UA standards.
>
> We can't find any references to their correct usage in WCAG, either.
>
> And what happened to the search utility on the WAI website?
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ It's now so difficult to find information there.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --Bevi Chagnon
>
>
>
>
>
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >