E-mail List Archives
Re: PDF vs. CSS media @ print
Date: Mar 16, 2005 9:32AM
- Next message: firstname.lastname@example.org: "RE"
- Previous message: Rachael M Kircher: "microphones"
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: KNOCK Alistair: "Re: PDF vs. CSS media @ print"
- View all messages in this Thread
>We are following Section 508 and wish to limit
use of PDF's.
>We produce a number of long and complex documents for the public to
>download and print. It is important that the content on their printouts
>matches, page-for-page, the original version.
>(i.e. graph 16 needs to be on page 23 on both)
>I'm seeking to learn of people's experience using the CSS media @
>print technique or other such approaches?
First, I'm curious as to why you want to move away
from/limit the use of PDF's?
Now, to your question(s) - I, like some of the other
respondents to your original post have had spotty (at best) results using
the CSS @media route due to browser quirks. If page for page print accuracy
is what you're after, then relying on browser interpretation and rendering
is asking for trouble.
My standard operating procedure is to offer the original
doc in it's native format for download (.doc, etc. - making sure that file
is accessible). In addition, I provide the information as html and as an
accessible PDF. Accessible, properly tagged pdf's aren't quite as hard
to create as they once were... Acrobat 6 and 7 are (IMHO) good at generating
accessible files now. Of course, if you're remediating old documents, the
burden is a little higher... but not insurmountable. In this instance,
I would rely on each technique to address the situation for which it is
best suited - accessible html for web delivery and access, and accessible
PDF for print accuracy and accessibility.
Kevin H. Spruill AWA/CNTR/FAA
FAA Section 508 Technical Support