E-mail List Archives
Re: PDF vs. HTML
Date: Jul 31, 2004 12:06AM
- Next message: earl.machen: "Re: PDF vs. HTML"
- Previous message: mmoore: "Re: PDF vs. HTML"
- Next message in Thread: earl.machen: "Re: PDF vs. HTML"
- Previous message in Thread: mmoore: "Re: PDF vs. HTML"
- View all messages in this Thread
>That said, as developers we still must satisfy our client's
> wishes to use other forms of content
i don't know who are you clients, but my clients only say:
You are the expert, so you know how to build (accessible ) websites.
I also don't tell the butcher how to treat the meat..
i don't want to exclude anybody from information, so I will never offer
pdf-files as the only file-format.
And especcially not when statistics tell that only 10% has the plug-in.
I don't see any reason to use it.
And what legal reason?
----- Original Message -----
From: "mmoore" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
To: "WebAIM Discussion List" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 4:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF vs. HTML
> Gutten tag Ineke,
> I agree with you - this is the reason that we recommend that people
> pdf's or any other plug-in do two things. First check to see if the
> is accessible and second provide a link to acquire the plug-in.
> In general I much prefer to present content in html over any other
> It has more predictable results and requires less expertise to get to
> content on the part of the user, particularly when using assistive
> technologies. That said, as developers we still must satisfy our
> wishes to use other forms of content. The main reasons that I have
> for desiring pdfs seems to be that it is much more difficult to alter
> type of content so it makes sense from a legal standpoint. Also pdfs
> produce better results when printed but you can achieve very good
> using stylesheets. The final reason is the ability to use scanned
> documents, saving considerable development costs over recreating the
> content. Unfortunately this is also where the most frequent
> issues occur.
> What we really need is a quantum shift in attitude about publishing on
> WWW. If the information that we place on the web is worth publishing
> it should be easily available to everyone. If it is not worth taking
> effort to make it accessible we should ask ourselves if it is really
> publishing at all.
> Well enough of a soap box for tonight. (Must be the election season)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: inekemaa [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 5:48 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] PDF vs. HTML
> Hello Mike,
> You wrote:
> >Actually even scanned documents can be made to be accessible with the
> >version of Adobe. OCR functionality is built in. Contact Greg
> >Adobe for more details.
> PDF can be made accessible, but how many people downloaded the Acrobat
> reader for reading pdf-files?
> In Germany it is only 10%. (http://www.webhits.de, link: web
> Ineke van der Maat