E-mail List Archives
Thread: achieving PDF/UA compliance
Number of posts in this thread: 14 (In chronological order)
From: David Farough
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 8:40AM
Subject: achieving PDF/UA compliance
No previous message | Next message →
I am working on a document which has passed the acrobat Accessibility checker.
I am as the subject indicates trying to pass the PDF/UA standard.
I am trying to use the pre flight tool to fix any remaining issues.
I am using Jaws and these dialogues are extremely difficult to use and understand.
Does anyone have any tips or suggestions to make this easier?
I am not sure about the best profile to use or what aspects of this process to concentrate on.
The PAC 2021 accessibility checker indicates that I have some content and structure issues to deal with and a font issue as well.
Any advice is appreciated.
Thanks
From: Garmer, Shawn
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 8:55AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
If you are using the PAC 2021 checker, you may find taggedpdf.com helpful in deciphering the results and applying a fix using Acrobat Pro.
Full URL is https://tagged.pdf.com
Embrace the journey.
From: Steve Green
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 10:33AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
I find that the Preflight tool only helps to fix a few of the PDF/UA issues we encounter. We fix most of the issues in other ways, mostly in the Tags panel. It's also worth noting that the Commonlook PDF Validator tests for PDF/UA conformance more thoroughly than PAC2021. And there are some tests you have to do manually.
If it's any consolation, I am fully sighted but find the Preflight dialog difficult to understand. I don't think it has changed in the 18 years I have been doing PDF remediation and it could seriously do with a redesign.
Steve Green
Managing Director
Test Partners Ltd
From: Karen McCall
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 11:12AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
+1 and accessibility added!
I still call the one icon in Preflight "the blue wrench" because I have no idea what it is called and hovering a mouse over it results in nothing.
Cheers, Karen
From: Jon Brundage
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 11:33AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Steve-
Do you find the declaration of "UA" a bit like VPATs? I am dubious of the claims when someone says "this is UA so it is accessible. "UA" (like VPATs) is more of an honor system in my opinion. I could construct a PDF that is inaccessible and still get it to take the "UA" declaration.
Thoughts?
Jon
From: Karen McCall
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 11:41AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
I agree. It is a voluntary sticker that someone can apply to a PDF. I really don't like applications that simply add it in with an accessibility check. I then have to figure out how to remove it while remediating the PDF. I perform accessibility checks often during remediation so don't want the identifier attached until or unless I want to add it.
I don't add it to my PDFs.
Cheers, Karen
From: Steve Green
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 12:16PM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
As a rule I don't believe any accessibility conformance statement I didn't write myself, although I would trust them from some of the people in this forum. Very few stand up to any scrutiny. That said, if a PDF passes an automated PDF/UA check, it's usually a good sign because you can't pass it by accident. It requires a lot of good design and/or remediation, so whoever did it probably know what they were doing.
PDF/UA conformance doesn't mean that the document is accessible, but the likelihood is it's far more accessible than most.
Steve
From: L Snider
Date: Tue, Mar 28 2023 1:32PM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
I echo was Steve said....It is funny, I was just using it last week and
thinking it was soooo 1996! For most of the fixes, in my experience, I have
had to do them outside Preflight. I find it one of the worst things to use
for usability.
Cheers
Lisa
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 1:33 PM Steve Green < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> I find that the Preflight tool only helps to fix a few of the PDF/UA
> issues we encounter. We fix most of the issues in other ways, mostly in
> the Tags panel. It's also worth noting that the Commonlook PDF Validator
> tests for PDF/UA conformance more thoroughly than PAC2021. And there are
> some tests you have to do manually.
>
> If it's any consolation, I am fully sighted but find the Preflight dialog
> difficult to understand. I don't think it has changed in the 18 years I
> have been doing PDF remediation and it could seriously do with a redesign.
>
> Steve Green
> Managing Director
> Test Partners Ltd
>
>
>
From: chagnon
Date: Wed, Mar 29 2023 7:28AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
I'm not sure passing a PDF/UA check is always a good sign of sufficient accessibility.
Just had a PDF from a client that consisted of only P tags, and several tables and sidebar boxes weren't even tagged at all.
But it did pass the Acrobat checker, and even had the PDF/UA identifier/medallion on it.
Bevi
â â â
Bevi Chagnon | Designer, Accessibility Technician | = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
â â â
PubCom: Technologists for Accessible Design + Publishing
consulting ⢠training ⢠development ⢠design ⢠sec. 508 services
Upcoming classes at www.PubCom.com/classes
â â â
Latest blog-newsletter â Simple Guide to Writing Alt-Text
From: Duff Johnson
Date: Wed, Mar 29 2023 7:42AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
> I'm not sure passing a PDF/UA check is always a good sign of sufficient accessibility.
Most checkers have to deal with the problem that (today) questions such as…
- Is all the content tagged correctly, or has some real content been marked as artifact?
- Are the choices of tags (semantics) accurate?
- Does the flow of content through the tags reflect the author's intent?
Today, most software does a lousy job of getting this stuff right, or doesn't try at all, trusting the human author.
I'm aware of AI that's getting better and better with this sort of thing.. doubtless there will at some point be AI-powered products that are really smart at validating PDF/UA's (and WCAG's) human checks… but it ain't today.
> Just had a PDF from a client that consisted of only P tags, and several tables and sidebar boxes weren't even tagged at all.
> But it did pass the Acrobat checker, and even had the PDF/UA identifier/medallion on it.
Sounds like the author flat-out cheated (e.g., marked real content as artifact), doubtless among other crimes.
With PDF/UA, downstream users at least have an accountability mechanism, whether or not they choose to use it…
Duff Johnson
PDF Association
pdfa.org
From: Steve Green
Date: Wed, Mar 29 2023 9:27AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
I didn't say that. I said a PDF/UA conformant document is more likely to be accessible than most others. But that won't always be the case, just as WCAG conformance usually means a website is reasonably accessible, but it doesn't guarantee it.
Did your document actually pass a PDF/UA test or did it just have the identifier and logo? Obviously my comments were based on documents actually passing.
Steve
From: chagnon
Date: Wed, Mar 29 2023 3:33PM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
Apologies, Steve.
Your last comment helps clear up what you originally wrote
/quote if a PDF passes an automated PDF/UA check, it's usually a good sign because you can't pass it by accident. /endquote.
What do you mean by "an automated PDF/UA check?
â It passed Acrobat's built in PDF checker?
â It passed a 3rd party checker, like PAC or Commonlook?
â It passed a manual check and testing with assistive technologies? (although I wouldn't consider this an automated check!)
Acrobat's automated checker will pass a document with just P tags, or with a scan for the entire page and tagged as Figure with Alt Text that says "graphic of text." Acrobat's checker does indeed pass these failed PDFs by accident.
Even better checkers like PAC and CommonLook don't find mis-tagged content, poor reading orders, or a stack of figures at the bottom of the tag tree of a 350 page book.
But if you mean the whole enchilada of checking PDFs (automated + Human), then yes, I too assume that the file is probably fairly accessible to most people and their technologies.
â â â
Bevi Chagnon | Designer, Accessibility Technician | = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
â â â
PubCom: Technologists for Accessible Design + Publishing
consulting ⢠training ⢠development ⢠design ⢠sec. 508 services
Upcoming classes at www.PubCom.com/classes
â â â
Latest blog-newsletter â Simple Guide to Writing Alt-Text
From: Steve Green
Date: Wed, Mar 29 2023 5:43PM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | Next message →
I am simply talking about probability, because there is no certainty in what we do.
A PDF that doesn't pass an automated PDF/UA check might be perfectly accessible, but probably isn't.
A PDF that passes an automated PDF/UA check is probably more accessible than one that doesn't, but it might not be.
A PDF that passes an automated PDF/UA check and a manual WCAG check and assistive technology testing is probably highly accessible, but it might not be to some people. Ideally, every PDF would be tested and remediated to this level, but it's not affordable and there aren't enough people with the skills to do it. It's inevitable that many documents will be tested and remediated to a lower level, but that's better than not doing anything at all.
Steve
From: Laura Roberts
Date: Thu, Mar 30 2023 7:06AM
Subject: Re: achieving PDF/UA compliance
← Previous message | No next message
This thread reminds me of a recent encounter with another accessibility
specialist who is clearly experienced in WCAG and websites, but not so much
in PDF/UA documents. He has created a word template that he claims will
never need remediation after PDF conversion. Will it need less remediation?
Yes. Will it need none? Nope.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 7:43 PM Steve Green < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> I am simply talking about probability, because there is no certainty in
> what we do.
>
> A PDF that doesn't pass an automated PDF/UA check might be perfectly
> accessible, but probably isn't.
>
> A PDF that passes an automated PDF/UA check is probably more accessible
> than one that doesn't, but it might not be.
>
> A PDF that passes an automated PDF/UA check and a manual WCAG check and
> assistive technology testing is probably highly accessible, but it might
> not be to some people. Ideally, every PDF would be tested and remediated to
> this level, but it's not affordable and there aren't enough people with the
> skills to do it. It's inevitable that many documents will be tested and
> remediated to a lower level, but that's better than not doing anything at
> all.
>
> Steve
>
>
>