WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Word viewer

for

From: Phil Teare
Date: Nov 16, 2006 3:20AM

Helpful hack making word docs accessible:


1) save your word doc as HTML (Word will do this, so will OO)

2) Serve the document created with either .doc headers or html headers
depending on how the users whants to view them.

MS Word will open thisIsAnHTMLVersionOfADocFile.html as a document, if you
simply change its name to thisIsAnHTMLVersionOfADocFile.doc The innards of
the file will be HTML but the name (which could be set manually or by your
server on serveing it) ends in .doc making ms word treat it like it's a
document.

Hope this helps.

Phil






On 16/11/06, Jukka K. Korpela < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Cheryl Amato wrote:
>
> > I am currently evaluating a website for accessibility and am wondering
> > exactly how to handle Word documents.
>
> They should be converted into accessible HTML format. Perhaps this is not
> (economically) _feasible_, but it shouldn't be called _impossible_. It is
> a policy decision, and the most important accessibility policy decision
> with respect to such documents. All the rest is really peanuts.
>
> > If a web page is linked to a Word
> > document I realize you must notify the user
>
> Indeed, and in an explicit way, e.g. "(MS Word document)" after the link.
> Using an icon, naturally with e.g. alt="(MS Word document)" is possible,
> too, though the common icons for Word documents are not really universally
> understood. Using type="application/msword" in HTML markup would be a
> nice, structured way to express the information, but no browser support to
> it is required and practically no support actually exists.
>
> > but should you also provide a
> > link to the Word Viewer for those who don't have the software?
>
> That's what many accessibility recommendations say, but that's really just
> a way to silence one's conscience. It looks like you're doing _something_
> to improve accessibility, but it really doesn't help much. A user who
> is _allowed_ and _able_ and _willing_ install software on a computer will
> find a viewer without your help - perhaps a better viewer than you would
> offer. And _which_ viewer would you link to? Well, of course all the world
> uses Microsoft(r) operating systems...
>
> The only good reason to provide a link would be the fact that most people
> who need a viewer would want to use the Microsoft Word viewer and they
> have difficulties in finding it on the Microsoft site, since it has been
> "renewed" so often. But for that reason, your link would quite probably
> become a dead link rather soon, and a dead link is often worse than no
> link.
>
> Alternatively, if you know a document that _describes_ Word viewers, their
> installation and use, in a language understood by your visitors, then
> _that_ might be a good page to link to. But could you rely on the page
> remaining on the www and remaining as useful?
>
> > Would this also be true for Powerpoint and Excel files (both have
> > viewers available)?
>
> The same principles apply. Actually, even stronger, since a typical user
> often knows how to use a Word viewer, which is effectively a read-only
> word processor, hence of a well-known type of program, but fewer people
> are familiar with spreadsheet software. Using a viewer is _much_ more than
> just knowing a download address!
>
> > I am under the impression that the viewers are not
> > necessarily accessible themselves.
>
> They surely have their share of accessibility problems.
>
> --
> Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


--
Phil Teare,
Lead Developer,
www.talklets.com