WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Wait, wait...who has to abide by Sec. 508?

for

From: chagnon@pubcom.com
Date: Apr 19, 2019 1:47PM

Just because it's common practice doesn't give the legal community a valid excuse for doing it. It'll probably take a high-profile lawsuit to get the legal community to make their documents accessible.

And with his particular report, DOJ's Mueller Report, it's a public-facing document created by a federal agency so it's covered by Sec. 508. They are not above the law.

— — —
Bevi Chagnon, founder/CEO | <EMAIL REMOVED>
— — —
PubCom: Technologists for Accessible Design + Publishing
consulting ' training ' development ' design ' sec. 508 services
Upcoming classes at www.PubCom.com/classes
— — —
Latest blog-newsletter – Accessibility Tips at www.PubCom.com/blog

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Duff Johnson
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 2:34 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Wait, wait...who has to abide by Sec. 508?

> I've heard it's a common practice in litigation as well to delivery OCR'd documents without tags to make it more difficult for the other side to search digital information during discovery. So -- seems like a tactic to make it more difficult to find and analyze the data. I could also imagine that there might be some misunderstandings about redaction and PDF tags that could trigger concerns by those releasing redacted content.

That's all true; it's a (lamentably) common practice in litigation.

However in this case it's clearly DoJ's job to know about those matters… and to know that there's no problem or concern with redacting tagged PDF. Redacted is redacted.

Sadly, we've yet to see developers supporting the new features in PDF 2.0 that explicitly enable accessible redaction… but if people do as the DoJ did - trash their PDFs by rendering them as images - then tags are kind of irrelevant.

Duff.