E-mail List Archives

Re: PDF Container tags

for

From: Chagnon | PubCom.com
Date: Sep 30, 2015 10:30AM


Thanks everyone for your comments.
It's clear that:

1. There isn't a clear definition for each of the container tags as to what their intended purposes are.
2. Current specs/definition are ambiguous and confusing.
3. Current AT doesn't use them, but they are "exposed" to AT so there's the possibility that they could have a useful purpose.

We do have a long way to go in this field, don't we?

--Bevi Chagnon

— — —
Bevi Chagnon | www.PubCom.com | <EMAIL REMOVED>
Technologists, Consultants, Trainers, Designers, and Developers
for publishing & communication
| PRINT | WEB | PDF | EPUB | Sec. 508 ACCESSIBILITY |
— — —




-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Andrew Kirkpatrick
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 10:09 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF Container tags

Bevi,
At least with Adobe Reader, Part, Article, Section, Division, and Document tags are exposed for assistive technology to have access to. I do not believe that any AT does anything with this information currently, but that isn’t to say that they couldn’t.

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe Systems

<EMAIL REMOVED>
http://twitter.com/awkawk
http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility







On 9/28/15, 22:29, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Chagnon | PubCom.com" < <EMAIL REMOVED> on behalf of <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

>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
>> >>
>>>archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>>
>>>archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>