E-mail List Archives
Thread: tagging PDF's
Number of posts in this thread: 9 (In chronological order)
From: Karlen Communications
Date: Thu, Mar 22 2012 5:18AM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
No previous message | Next message →
While it is preferable to have both the Tags Panel and the Order Panel match
up, adaptive technology reads through the Tags Tree so making sure it is
correct is the goal. There are some documents where you simply can't get the
two to match up. There is also a bug when converting Word documents
containing images to tagged PDF where the images will always be placed at
the bottom of the page items in the Order Panel no matter where they are on
the page. The Tags will be correct but the Order Panel is "off."
As long as the Tags are correct and in the correct order, you should be
good.
Cheers, Karen
From: Bevi Chagnon
Date: Thu, Mar 22 2012 7:39AM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | Next message →
Karen wrote: "While it is preferable to have both the Tags Panel and the
Order Panel match up, adaptive technology reads through the Tags Tree so
making sure it is correct is the goal."
I've come across some AT (other than screen readers) that do use the PDF's
Reading Order but I can't recall which ones off the top of my head.
Keep in mind that Acrobat's Reflow utility is one that follows the Reading
Order, sort of. Reflow doesn't follow Reading Order precisely, but there is
a definite correlation for most of the items on a PDF's page. I've learned
that Reflow is being taught to low-vision users so that they can more easily
enlarge text and navigate through a multi-column PDF.
Dana, in InDesign, you can control the PDF's RO through the Articles and
Layers panels. The sequence in the Articles panel is top down, that is the
top most item will be read first in the PDF's RO. In the Layers panel, it's
the opposite: the bottom most item will be read first in the PDF's RO.
So put the 2 panels side-by-side on your monitor and try to get them to
match up, top down and bottom up. It won't be perfect because the Layers
panel will have more items in it than the Articles panel, but get as close
as you can.
One suggestion: minimize the number of layers used in InDesign to make it
easier to rearrange the order of layout items. INDD is not Photoshop and
most layouts don't need layers to create the visual design, but many
designers have gotten into the habit of using them unnecessarily.
- Bevi Chagnon
PS: The latest issue of InDesign Magazine has my article about making
accessible PDFs from InDesign layouts. http://indesignmag.com/ It's not my
full 3-day class, but it does cover the basics and should help you on this
project.
--
Bevi Chagnon | = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
PubCom - Trainers, consultants, designers, and developers
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and Federal Section 508
--
* It's our 30th Year! *
From: Duff Johnson
Date: Thu, Mar 22 2012 9:57AM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | Next message →
This issue is one of my bugbears, as some of you know all too well.
On Mar 22, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Bevi Chagnon wrote:
> Karen wrote: "While it is preferable to have both the Tags Panel and the
> Order Panel match up, adaptive technology reads through the Tags Tree so
> making sure it is correct is the goal."
>
> I've come across some AT (other than screen readers) that do use the PDF's
> Reading Order but I can't recall which ones off the top of my head.
So-called AT which uses "reading order" (better understood as: "painting order" for reasons that I will be only too happy to explain again should it be necessary) is relying on LUCK, no more, no less.
Further, so-called AT depending on "reading order" is incapable (in principle, not just in practice) of representing semantic structures such as lists and tables.
Consequently, there is no such thing as AT which uses "reading order" in PDF unless you are also willing to consider a plain-text viewer as an AT for web-pages.
A car will open a can of beans if you drive over the can _just_ right, but (a) it will always make a mess and (b) this capability does not mean that a car is a can-opener.
Likewise, with Acrobat Reflow we have software that offers a few people some (very limited) success some (very limited) amount of the time. That does not make it AT.
> Keep in mind that Acrobat's Reflow utility is one that follows the Reading
> Order, sort of. Reflow doesn't follow Reading Order precisely, but there is
> a definite correlation for most of the items on a PDF's page. I've learned
> that Reflow is being taught to low-vision users so that they can more easily
> enlarge text and navigate through a multi-column PDF.
Acrobat's Reflow is a curse in no small part because it so RADICALLY muddied the waters for users while being just (barely) useful enough to be plausible from time-to-time (basically, as a function of the simplicity of the document) that some have learned to live with it, regardless of how poor an implementation it really is.
> Dana, in InDesign, you can control the PDF's RO through the Articles and
> Layers panels. The sequence in the Articles panel is top down, that is the
> top most item will be read first in the PDF's RO. In the Layers panel, it's
> the opposite: the bottom most item will be read first in the PDF's RO.
>
> So put the 2 panels side-by-side on your monitor and try to get them to
> match up, top down and bottom up. It won't be perfect because the Layers
> panel will have more items in it than the Articles panel, but get as close
> as you can.
How fantastically embarrassing that InDesign is still so poor at PDF production! How many years has it been since tagged PDF was released?
> One suggestion: minimize the number of layers used in InDesign to make it
> easier to rearrange the order of layout items. INDD is not Photoshop and
> most layouts don't need layers to create the visual design, but many
> designers have gotten into the habit of using them unnecessarily.
…that, and tell Adobe to fix ID already!
Duff.
From: Bevi Chagnon
Date: Thu, Mar 22 2012 11:51AM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | Next message →
Duff, your points are noted.
I'm not going to defend Reflow and other technologies that use the reading
order.
But I don't believe we have the luxury to ignore Reading Order, or tell
users that they shouldn't use the free Reflow utility in Acrobat and instead
should purchase and use another tool. Or tell users with older AT they must
upgrade, even when they can't afford the cost.
Sure, Reflow isn't a great tool for accessibility but it's free, it's easy
to learn, it satisfies the need for a certain portion of the population, and
senior and disability centers show their clients how to use it. As a
teacher, I've worked with many disabled users on a fixed income with little
money to spare. They have few alternatives so they'll do what most people do
-- use what's already there. Not a perfect solution, but it "suffices" for
them.
A better strategy is to acknowledge that the tool exists and people use it,
and therefore we should work with it as much as it is feasible to do so.
Since it takes just a few mouse clicks in the source document to clean up
most, if not all, of the reading order, I think it's worth the time to do
so. This is not hard to do in most InDesign layouts.
< Further, so-called AT depending on "reading order" is incapable (in
principle, not just in practice) of representing semantic structures such as
lists and tables. >
Semantic structure isn't as critical for those AT users who are fully
sighted. Helpful at times, but not as critical as for blind and low-vision
users.
< How fantastically embarrassing that InDesign is still so poor at PDF
production! How many years has it been since tagged PDF was released? >
Actually, InDesign isn't "so poor at PDF production." About 90% of the
problems I see are user errors (often untrained users who don't even use
paragraph styles to trigger semantic tags, let alone other layout
techniques). The other 10%, sure Adobe needs to work on those issues and
from what I understand, they're aware of at least the most important ones.
But I'm not here to defend Adobe, either. Just trying to clarify the
discussion.
--Bevi
--
Bevi Chagnon | = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
PubCom - Trainers, consultants, designers, and developers
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and Federal Section 508
--
* It's our 30th Year! *
From: Ted
Date: Thu, Mar 22 2012 12:09PM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | Next message →
Sorry but I have to disagree that the Order Panel doesn't matter - it
certainly does for people who need to view documents in Reflow view, for
example people with various low vision conditions, not to mention the
reading order for PDFs viewed on many mobile devices.
The key to fixing it in Acrobat is to do the Order Panel first and then the
tags panel (changing the Order Panel affects both views whereas changing
reading order in the tags tree affects only the tags output).
The key to fixing it in InDesign is to go through each page working from
bottom right to top left and sending each frame in turn to the back in the
stacking order. This works perfectly in InDesign CS5.5 but for previous
versions it doesn't work for images which will still have to be fixed in
Acrobat as above.
Ted Page
Director, PWS Ltd
Registered in England no. 06508410.
Registered office: 4 Riverview, Walnut Tree Close, Guildford, Surrey GU1 4UX
From: Duff Johnson
Date: Thu, Mar 22 2012 12:27PM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | Next message →
On Mar 22, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Bevi Chagnon wrote:
> Duff, your points are noted.
>
> I'm not going to defend Reflow and other technologies that use the reading
> order.
>
> But I don't believe we have the luxury to ignore Reading Order, or tell
> users that they shouldn't use the free Reflow utility in Acrobat and instead
> should purchase and use another tool. Or tell users with older AT they must
> upgrade, even when they can't afford the cost.
I appreciate this point entirely, and thank you for raising it as I should have done.
My comments were intended to bewail the prevailing situation, not to recommend against using Reflow per se. Indeed, my company makes software that "harmonizes" tags and content-order; we do this because it's a requested feature, no matter my big-picture gripes. So what if I know that they don't know what they're missing? They want it, I get that.
The reason I rant on this point as I do is simply that this precise issue is the foundation of the AT community's entirely justified frustration with PDF. Perpetuating software that causes people to expend effort on documents to make them work with a particular piece of software - as opposed to work in general - bothers me.
In other words - by all means, make your PDFs "work" with Reflow - but be sure they're properly tagged FIRST. Indeed, the tag-order is the "order" that the content should follow, if you want Reflow to be successful.
> Sure, Reflow isn't a great tool for accessibility but it's free, it's easy
> to learn, it satisfies the need for a certain portion of the population, and
> senior and disability centers show their clients how to use it. As a
> teacher, I've worked with many disabled users on a fixed income with little
> money to spare. They have few alternatives so they'll do what most people do
> -- use what's already there. Not a perfect solution, but it "suffices" for
> them.
I don't dispute that it's useful to some and that the price is right. It could do vastly more if it was implemented correctly - that's my only point.
> A better strategy is to acknowledge that the tool exists and people use it,
> and therefore we should work with it as much as it is feasible to do so.
> Since it takes just a few mouse clicks in the source document to clean up
> most, if not all, of the reading order, I think it's worth the time to do
> so. This is not hard to do in most InDesign layouts.
Yes, if you know what you're doing in InDesign, a highly accessible PDF is easy to produce. The same, unfortunately, cannot be said for the vast majority of PDFs that are created using other means.
> < Further, so-called AT depending on "reading order" is incapable (in
> principle, not just in practice) of representing semantic structures such as
> lists and tables. >
>
> Semantic structure isn't as critical for those AT users who are fully
> sighted. Helpful at times, but not as critical as for blind and low-vision
> users.
Yes. I'm simply pointing out that the Reflow experience - were it based on tags - would be profoundly better than what they have today.
> < How fantastically embarrassing that InDesign is still so poor at PDF
> production! How many years has it been since tagged PDF was released? >
>
> Actually, InDesign isn't "so poor at PDF production." About 90% of the
> problems I see are user errors (often untrained users who don't even use
> paragraph styles to trigger semantic tags, let alone other layout
> techniques). The other 10%, sure Adobe needs to work on those issues and
> from what I understand, they're aware of at least the most important ones.
>
> But I'm not here to defend Adobe, either. Just trying to clarify the
> discussion.
I appreciate the clarification.
Best regards,
Duff Johnson
President, NetCentric US (Creators of CommonLook)
Office: +1 617 401 8140
Mobile: +1 617 283 4226
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
www.commonlook.com
From: Karlen Communications
Date: Thu, Mar 22 2012 2:09PM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | Next message →
Sorry, what I was saying is that for some documents there is no way of
reconciling the Order Panel and Tags Panel/Tree and in those
cases/documents, concentrate on the Tags Tree.
In those types of documents, even starting with the Order Panel is not
possible as the document gets corrupted, content disappears, moves out of
its layering and generally cannot be repaired. These are flawed or fragile
PDF documents. For some of them even removing each page, trying to Tag them
separately and reassembling the document doesn't work.
Ideally you do want the Content, Order and Tags Panels to agree but in some
documents they simply can't.
Cheers, Karen
From: Dana L. Tallon
Date: Fri, Mar 23 2012 12:20PM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | Next message →
This is my whole problem. When I rearrange the reading order the design is altered. We have always had this problem. I was hoping that the Tag Tree would be okay. Our agency still creates a Large Print text file and Braille Ready text file of our publications so I know I am covered. But I know the one file fully accessible goes along way and that is what I am striving for. Through this discussion I have learned a lot on the proper tagging in Indesign and future projects I hope to do better so the reading order can be right.
Thank you all!
Dana Tallon
From: Sébastien Delorme
Date: Wed, Mar 28 2012 2:00AM
Subject: Re: tagging PDF's
← Previous message | No next message
Hello,
Yes, when you change the reading order from the Order panel, the order
objects are overlaid on the page is also changed. Sometimes when you
edit content in the Order panel, an object which should be in front of
another ends up behind it, and therefore adversely affects the layout.
You then need to manually correct it.
So I recommand to define the reading order from the Tags panel and the
content reflow from the Content panel.
I try to explain this in AcceDe PDF manuals :
http://www.pdf-accessible.com/en/accede-manuals/
7 - Defining the reading order, page 46
and
9 - Checking the content reflow, page 72
I hope it will be useful for you.
Regards,
Sébastien Delorme
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
T=E9l. 01 45 26 77 89 / Port. 06 10 70 16 01
Fax. 09 57 59 77 97
----------------------------------------------------------------
Atalan
Accessibilit=E9 num=E9rique et sensibilisation au handicap
Plus d'informations sur www.atalan.fr
Atalan est coordinateur du projet AcceDe www.accede.info
Le 23/03/2012 19:20, Dana L. Tallon a =E9crit :
> This is my whole problem. When I rearrange the reading order the design is altered. We have always had this problem. I was hoping that the Tag Tree would be okay. Our agency still creates a Large Print text file and Braille Ready text file of our publications so I know I am covered. But I know the one file fully accessible goes along way and that is what I am striving for. Through this discussion I have learned a lot on the proper tagging in Indesign and future projects I hope to do better so the reading order can be right.
>
> Thank you all!
>
> Dana Tallon
>
>
>
>