WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Average Time to Create an Accessible PDF

for

From: Philip Kiff
Date: Dec 4, 2017 9:36AM

I agree with Alastair that there is no good answer to the question of an
average time to remediate a PDF.

Estimating the time it will take to remediate something is a bit of a
micro-skill in itself. I have a set of criteria that I look at to make
estimates that includes: file format (pdf, docx, pptx? Do you have the
source file), type of document (standard text? large graphical poster?
filled with tables and charts?), complexity (many embedded lists?
numbered headings? uses complex tables? lots of non-decorative images?),
and length. One special case: documents that require OCR I consider
individually unique and almost impossible to estimate without starting
to actually work on them.

In addition to those criteria, the amount of time required will also
depend on what you mean by "accessible". Everyone on this list I am sure
is always trying to make perfect documents that meet or exceed all
accessibility requirements everywhere. But there are degrees of
perfection, in my opinion. Even within my own work, documents that I
remediated just a year or two ago, and that passed the PAC 2 checker
cleanly, I would now do additional work on were they to come across my
desk again. On the other hand, I would also work more quickly than I did
a year or two ago, so maybe that all comes out in the wash in terms of
time estimates.

On 2017-12-04 10:39 AM, Josh Schroder wrote:
> For pure-text documents, I can probably do somewhere around 5 minutes per page, sometimes less.

Having stated all those caveats and exceptions above, and for the
purposes of useful discussion, I would say that it takes an average of
somewhere between 3 and 12 minutes a page for me to remediate 90% of the
standard documents I work on.

On 2017-12-04 10:39 AM, Josh Schroder wrote:
> I'm also a big proponent of CommonLook PDF. It is expensive, but it really speeds things up and reduces the frustration of dealing with the inefficient workflows in Acrobat. If you do this work often, and you consider the cost of your labor per hour, it can potentially be a really good value.

Regarding remediation software, I would encourage folks to look at
AxesPDF instead of CommonLook PDF, at least until CommonLook provides
some kind of sane pricing structure for third-party licences to folks
who want to get paid to remediate PDFs for others. AxesPDF is  available
at a fraction of the cost and performs almost all the most important
time-saving functions as CommonLook's software does. In terms of
cost-per-hour, it would literally be cheaper for me to pay someone else
to remediate files for me than it would be for me to purchase a license
from CommonLook that lets me remediate files for you.

Phil.


On 2017-12-04 10:39 AM, Josh Schroder wrote:
> For pure-text documents, I can probably do somewhere around 5 minutes per page, sometimes less.
>
> I'm also a big proponent of CommonLook PDF. It is expensive, but it really speeds things up and reduces the frustration of dealing with the inefficient workflows in Acrobat. If you do this work often, and you consider the cost of your labor per hour, it can potentially be a really good value.
>
> Josh Schroder
> Web Administrator II
> Office of Strategic Communications
> Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation
> (512) 936-8937
>
>