E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 7 (In chronological order)

From: Kremers, Lindsay M.
Date: Thu, Oct 09 2003 2:24PM
Subject: adobe 6.0 accessibility
No previous message | Next message →

The State of North Dakota is working to bring our websites into compliance
with ADA. This compliance includes the ability of PDF forms to be "read" by
a tool on a visually impaired individual's computer.
Apparently, Adobe Acrobat 6.0 claims to create ADA compliant forms. Has
anyone tested this function and does it work? Are there any settings or
tools we should be using as we design the forms to be fillable in PDF to
assist with reading the graphics, instructions, and fields in the proper
order?
Has anyone had technical problems with Adobe 6.0 Professional on their
systems? A cowork

From: jeb
Date: Thu, Oct 09 2003 9:50PM
Subject: RE: adobe 6.0 accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

adobe 6.0 accessibilityThere is not a simple answer to your question... so
here is a good source reference for review:
http://www.webaim.org/howto/acrobat/

Bottom line is that the software is only part of the issue, the user has to
make the effort to make the PDF accessible. Quite frankly, I think HTML is
easier and would choose that over PDF any day.

There has been some discussion in this group about Forms, and I will let
other ring in with specifics.

Regarding tech problems, my only recent experience is with Acrobat Reader
6.0 and that is a far superior product than version 5.0 IMHO. 5.0 used to
lock up on me and take for ever to load.

John E. Brandt
Augusta, ME 04330

= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
www.jebswebs.com

From: Wayne Dick
Date: Fri, Oct 10 2003 10:01AM
Subject: Re: adobe 6.0 accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

Jeb and all.

As a low vision user, I have found PDF the worst product for accessibility
out there. The problem is simple. The main purpose for PDF is to create
exact images of printed pages. Well, print never worked for any visually
impaired people. So here we have an example of brilliant mathematics and
engineering spent on giving us an electronic version of something that never
worked.

Most low vision users, expecially those between 20/80 and 20/200 prefer,
large print, well spaced output that has been reformatted to fit the
available screen space. Most word processors do this extremely well. The
problem with PDF is that it does not enlarge intelligently. You cannot
control the spacing between lines. It doesn't port well into any accessible
visual interface.

Any product that enlarges without word wrapping is not accessible to low
vision users.

There is a large faculty that is assumed by many if not most in the
accessiblity business. That is that one size fits all. Audio output is not
the best or even the reasonable accommodation for people who can see, but
not a lot. The fact that PDF, or any format can be ported to screen readers
does not make it accessible. Any interface that cannot be enlarge by a
factor of 4 intelligently, is not really accessible. Also, without user
control of color, most products are marginal.

Poorly formated PDF is useless. Well formatted PDF is difficult to use, but
marginally possible. I usually spend about 10 minutes per page to obtain a
good readible document.

This year befor my term as Academic Senate Chair ends I hope to enact a
complete ban of PDF use on my campus. Next, I will try to extend it to the
entire CSU System.

Wish me luck,

Wayne Dick
Chair Academic Senate
Professor Computer Engineering and Computer Science
CSU Long Beach



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Jared Smith
Date: Fri, Oct 10 2003 10:56AM
Subject: Re[2]: adobe 6.0 accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

Wayne-

I totally agree with your argument that, in most cases, Adobe Acrobat
falls short when it comes to accessibility for diverse groups. PDF
documents do, however, play a role in Web content - as you state, "the
main purpose for PDF is to create exact images of printed pages".

Instead of trying to enact a ban on PDF for the sake of accessibility
(something that will undoubtedly bring resistance in a campus
setting), perhaps work on implementing a 'Web first, print second'
policy. This is really the dilemma with PDF documents, they are
typically designed as the first iteration of media. Developers then
struggle to make an HTML alternative or attempt in vain to make the
PDF itself universally accessible. If content were created for the Web,
in accessible HTML first, then provided as an alternative in PDF format (the
HTML to PDF conversion is simple), then the PDF document is there to
serve its function, you don't have the resistance you'd confront with
an anti-PDF campaign, and you get better accessibility. In doing so, I
think you'd find that the use of PDF will dramatically decrease on its
own, as designers and end users will typically choose HTML over PDF
any day.

Jared Smith
WebAIM (Web Accessibility In Mind)
Center for Persons with Disabilities
Utah State University



***************
On Friday, October 10, 2003 you sent:
WD> Jeb and all.

WD> As a low vision user, I have found PDF the worst product for accessibility
WD> out there. The problem is simple. The main purpose for PDF is to create
WD> exact images of printed pages. Well, print never worked for any visually
WD> impaired people. So here we have an example of brilliant mathematics and
WD> engineering spent on giving us an electronic version of something that never
WD> worked.

WD> Most low vision users, expecially those between 20/80 and 20/200 prefer,
WD> large print, well spaced output that has been reformatted to fit the
WD> available screen space. Most word processors do this extremely well. The
WD> problem with PDF is that it does not enlarge intelligently. You cannot
WD> control the spacing between lines. It doesn't port well into any accessible
WD> visual interface.

WD> Any product that enlarges without word wrapping is not accessible to low
WD> vision users.

WD> There is a large faculty that is assumed by many if not most in the
WD> accessiblity business. That is that one size fits all. Audio output is not
WD> the best or even the reasonable accommodation for people who can see, but
WD> not a lot. The fact that PDF, or any format can be ported to screen readers
WD> does not make it accessible. Any interface that cannot be enlarge by a
WD> factor of 4 intelligently, is not really accessible. Also, without user
WD> control of color, most products are marginal.

WD> Poorly formated PDF is useless. Well formatted PDF is difficult to use, but
WD> marginally possible. I usually spend about 10 minutes per page to obtain a
WD> good readible document.

WD> This year befor my term as Academic Senate Chair ends I hope to enact a
WD> complete ban of PDF use on my campus. Next, I will try to extend it to the
WD> entire CSU System.

WD> Wish me luck,

WD> Wayne Dick
WD> Chair Academic Senate
WD> Professor Computer Engineering and Computer Science
WD> CSU Long Beach



WD> ----
WD> To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
WD> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/


***************


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Wayne Dick
Date: Fri, Oct 10 2003 11:22AM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: adobe 6.0 accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

Jared,

That is a wise approach. I will integrate that into our program.

We are already working on a "limited template project" on our campus for
University web publications. The idea here is to provide a limited but
adequate set of web interface templates to satisfy the needs of our
departments and faculty. We will then focus on making this restricted set
of templates highly accessible and easy to manage by content managers. It
this effort we are going to offer ease of publication as the reward for
using accessible templates.


Thanks for the gentle insight,

Wayne

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jared Smith" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 9:53 AM
Subject: Re[2]: adobe 6.0 accessibility


> Wayne-
>
> I totally agree with your argument that, in most cases, Adobe Acrobat
> falls short when it comes to accessibility for diverse groups. PDF
> documents do, however, play a role in Web content - as you state, "the
> main purpose for PDF is to create exact images of printed pages".
>
> Instead of trying to enact a ban on PDF for the sake of accessibility
> (something that will undoubtedly bring resistance in a campus
> setting), perhaps work on implementing a 'Web first, print second'
> policy. This is really the dilemma with PDF documents, they are
> typically designed as the first iteration of media. Developers then
> struggle to make an HTML alternative or attempt in vain to make the
> PDF itself universally accessible. If content were created for the Web,
> in accessible HTML first, then provided as an alternative in PDF format
(the
> HTML to PDF conversion is simple), then the PDF document is there to
> serve its function, you don't have the resistance you'd confront with
> an anti-PDF campaign, and you get better accessibility. In doing so, I
> think you'd find that the use of PDF will dramatically decrease on its
> own, as designers and end users will typically choose HTML over PDF
> any day.
>
> Jared Smith
> WebAIM (Web Accessibility In Mind)
> Center for Persons with Disabilities
> Utah State University
>
>
>
> ***************
> On Friday, October 10, 2003 you sent:
> WD> Jeb and all.
>
> WD> As a low vision user, I have found PDF the worst product for
accessibility
> WD> out there. The problem is simple. The main purpose for PDF is to
create
> WD> exact images of printed pages. Well, print never worked for any
visually
> WD> impaired people. So here we have an example of brilliant mathematics
and
> WD> engineering spent on giving us an electronic version of something that
never
> WD> worked.
>
> WD> Most low vision users, expecially those between 20/80 and 20/200
prefer,
> WD> large print, well spaced output that has been reformatted to fit the
> WD> available screen space. Most word processors do this extremely well.
The
> WD> problem with PDF is that it does not enlarge intelligently. You
cannot
> WD> control the spacing between lines. It doesn't port well into any
accessible
> WD> visual interface.
>
> WD> Any product that enlarges without word wrapping is not accessible to
low
> WD> vision users.
>
> WD> There is a large faculty that is assumed by many if not most in the
> WD> accessiblity business. That is that one size fits all. Audio output
is not
> WD> the best or even the reasonable accommodation for people who can see,
but
> WD> not a lot. The fact that PDF, or any format can be ported to screen
readers
> WD> does not make it accessible. Any interface that cannot be enlarge by
a
> WD> factor of 4 intelligently, is not really accessible. Also, without
user
> WD> control of color, most products are marginal.
>
> WD> Poorly formated PDF is useless. Well formatted PDF is difficult to
use, but
> WD> marginally possible. I usually spend about 10 minutes per page to
obtain a
> WD> good readible document.
>
> WD> This year befor my term as Academic Senate Chair ends I hope to enact
a
> WD> complete ban of PDF use on my campus. Next, I will try to extend it
to the
> WD> entire CSU System.
>
> WD> Wish me luck,
>
> WD> Wayne Dick
> WD> Chair Academic Senate
> WD> Professor Computer Engineering and Computer Science
> WD> CSU Long Beach
>
>
>
> WD> ----
> WD> To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
> WD> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>
> ***************
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Fri, Oct 10 2003 11:28AM
Subject: Re: adobe 6.0 accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

Wayne,
In addition to Jared's comments, I'll add that a PDF document that has been
authored accessibly can address several of your concerns.

Acrobat Reader can wrap the text in some PDF documents. Try this: open a
pdf file, increase the magnification to 400%(or whatever you like), then hit
ctrl+4 (reflow text under the view menu).

This will not work for a document that is scanned into PDF, but it does work
for documents that are turned into PDFs from Microsoft Word or other sources
where the text is...text.

I have seen other documents in PDF that don't cooperate with this feature,
but don't know how they were authored and therefore don't know why they
aren't cooperating.

AWK



> Most low vision users, expecially those between 20/80 and 20/200 prefer,
> large print, well spaced output that has been reformatted to fit the
> available screen space. Most word processors do this extremely well. The
> problem with PDF is that it does not enlarge intelligently. You cannot
> control the spacing between lines. It doesn't port well into any accessible
> visual interface.
>
> Any product that enlarges without word wrapping is not accessible to low
> vision users.
>
> There is a large faculty that is assumed by many if not most in the
> accessiblity business. That is that one size fits all. Audio output is not
> the best or even the reasonable accommodation for people who can see, but
> not a lot. The fact that PDF, or any format can be ported to screen readers
> does not make it accessible. Any interface that cannot be enlarge by a
> factor of 4 intelligently, is not really accessible. Also, without user
> control of color, most products are marginal.
>
> Poorly formated PDF is useless. Well formatted PDF is difficult to use, but
> marginally possible. I usually spend about 10 minutes per page to obtain a
> good readible document.
>
> This year befor my term as Academic Senate Chair ends I hope to enact a
> complete ban of PDF use on my campus. Next, I will try to extend it to the
> entire CSU System.
>
> Wish me luck,
>
> Wayne Dick
> Chair Academic Senate
> Professor Computer Engineering and Computer Science
> CSU Long Beach
>
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>

--
Andrew Kirkpatrick
CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
125 Western Ave.
Boston, MA 02134
E-mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web site: ncam.wgbh.org

617-300-4420 (direct voice/FAX)
617-300-3400 (main NCAM)
617-300-2489 (TTY)

WGBH enriches people's lives through programs and services that educate,
inspire, and entertain, fostering citizenship and culture, the joy of
learning, and the power of diverse perspectives.



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Laurie Davis-Covin
Date: Tue, Oct 14 2003 6:56AM
Subject: Re: adobe 6.0 accessibility
← Previous message | No next message

Wayne,
I tried doing as you suggested with a document authored using Word. I'm
not getting the wrap. Have tried using Adobe Reader 5.0 and 6.0. And I
don't find "reflow text" under View. Am I missing something?

-Laurie

At 01:25 PM 10/10/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Wayne,
>In addition to Jared's comments, I'll add that a PDF document that has been
>authored accessibly can address several of your concerns.
>
>Acrobat Reader can wrap the text in some PDF documents. Try this: open a
>pdf file, increase the magnification to 400%(or whatever you like), then hit
>ctrl+4 (reflow text under the view menu).
>
>This will not work for a document that is scanned into PDF, but it does work
>for documents that are turned into PDFs from Microsoft Word or other sources
>where the text is...text.
>
>I have seen other documents in PDF that don't cooperate with this feature,
>but don't know how they were authored and therefore don't know why they
>aren't cooperating.
>
>AWK
>
>
>
> > Most low vision users, expecially those between 20/80 and 20/200 prefer,
> > large print, well spaced output that has been reformatted to fit the
> > available screen space. Most word processors do this extremely well. The
> > problem with PDF is that it does not enlarge intelligently. You cannot
> > control the spacing between lines. It doesn't port well into any
> accessible
> > visual interface.
> >
> > Any product that enlarges without word wrapping is not accessible to low
> > vision users.
> >
> > There is a large faculty that is assumed by many if not most in the
> > accessiblity business. That is that one size fits all. Audio output
> is not
> > the best or even the reasonable accommodation for people who can see, but
> > not a lot. The fact that PDF, or any format can be ported to screen
> readers
> > does not make it accessible. Any interface that cannot be enlarge by a
> > factor of 4 intelligently, is not really accessible. Also, without user
> > control of color, most products are marginal.
> >
> > Poorly formated PDF is useless. Well formatted PDF is difficult to
> use, but
> > marginally possible. I usually spend about 10 minutes per page to obtain a
> > good readible document.
> >
> > This year befor my term as Academic Senate Chair ends I hope to enact a
> > complete ban of PDF use on my campus. Next, I will try to extend it to the
> > entire CSU System.
> >
> > Wish me luck,
> >
> > Wayne Dick
> > Chair Academic Senate
> > Professor Computer Engineering and Computer Science
> > CSU Long Beach
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
> > visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
> >
>
>--
>Andrew Kirkpatrick
>CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
>125 Western Ave.
>Boston, MA 02134
>E-mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>Web site: ncam.wgbh.org
>
>617-300-4420 (direct voice/FAX)
>617-300-3400 (main NCAM)
>617-300-2489 (TTY)
>
>WGBH enriches people's lives through programs and services that educate,
>inspire, and entertain, fostering citizenship and culture, the joy of
>learning, and the power of diverse perspectives.
>
>
>
>----
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
>visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

Laurie Davis-Covin, Web Specialist/Writer
National Institute of Standards and Technology
100 Bureau Drive
Admin. Building, Room E 220
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Ph: 301-975-8027





----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/