WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Thread: PDF vs. CSS media @ print

for

Number of posts in this thread: 5 (In chronological order)

From: ED COHEN
Date: Mon, Mar 14 2005 9:33AM
Subject: PDF vs. CSS media @ print
No previous message | Next message →






Hello,
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?  
 
Thank you very much,
 
Ed CohenWeb Accessibility ManagerIndiana Department of
Environmental ManagementOffice of Information Technology<A
href="http://www.state.in.us/idem">http://www.state.in.us/idem
&nbsp;
<A
href="mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = "> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = :&nbsp;
317/232-8600&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 800/451-6027&nbsp;
Toll-free within Indiana)

From: Michael D. Roush
Date: Mon, Mar 14 2005 12:40PM
Subject: Re: PDF vs. CSS media @ print
← Previous message | Next message →

ecohen wrote:
> Hello,
> 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?

I have used the CSS print technique for a couple of sites, but never to
reproduce paged media. I would imagine with the variance in browsers
and default margins and such - combined with the ease with which style
sheets can be overridden by users - that an @print avenue for
reproducing paged media would present some problems guaranteeing that
the user's printed version would match your original.

Not that I'm dissuading the attempt. Making a 'printer-friendly'
version of the page using CSS is a great idea. But, how about offering
it *as well as* the PDF version, rather than instead of? Properly
produced PDF's offer some advantages that plain html/css does not.
However, if you are set on going away from PDF's entirely, the CSS route
with page-break-before attributes on the proper lines will serve you
well. You will probably have to define a particular font with a fixed
size for the print version, but this can cause some accessibility
problems as well.

Michael Roush

From: KNOCK Alistair
Date: Tue, Mar 15 2005 2:55AM
Subject: Re: PDF vs. CSS media @ print
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Ed,

> We produce a number of long and complex documents for the public to
download and print.
> Indiana Department of Environmental Management

That's the kind of joined-up thinking I like to see. :(

Produce the files in HTML and PDF, and encourage people to use either
version and print only if they have to. I'm sure it's possible to
create nicely paginated print-media CSS, but just imagine the browser
that ignores the precisely configured line-height you've chosen, and
splurges the bottom line of each page on to a new one... along with the
page break! Goodbye rainforest.

PDFs are OK providing you've presented an accessible version as the
alternative (or better, as the main version). You should also consider
whether it's best to make reference to page numbers at all; a chart with
relevance to the section of text should be situated very close to the
section of text, so that it can be referenced by the chart name / figure
number, and then the user need only flick back/forward one page. Of
course if it's a longer document with several references to the same
chart, then page numbers may be necessary or an appendix may be
preferable, depending on the impact required.

Cheers,
Alistair

From: KNOCK Alistair
Date: Tue, Mar 15 2005 2:55AM
Subject: Re: PDF vs. CSS media @ print
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Ed,

> We produce a number of long and complex documents for the public to
download and print.
> Indiana Department of Environmental Management

That's the kind of joined-up thinking I like to see. :(

Produce the files in HTML and PDF, and encourage people to use either
version and print only if they have to. I'm sure it's possible to
create nicely paginated print-media CSS, but just imagine the browser
that ignores the precisely configured line-height you've chosen, and
splurges the bottom line of each page on to a new one... along with the
page break! Goodbye rainforest.

PDFs are OK providing you've presented an accessible version as the
alternative (or better, as the main version). You should also consider
whether it's best to make reference to page numbers at all; a chart with
relevance to the section of text should be situated very close to the
section of text, so that it can be referenced by the chart name / figure
number, and then the user need only flick back/forward one page. Of
course if it's a longer document with several references to the same
chart, then page numbers may be necessary or an appendix may be
preferable, depending on the impact required.

Cheers,
Alistair

From: Kevin.CTR.Spruill@faa.gov
Date: Wed, Mar 16 2005 9:32AM
Subject: Re: PDF vs. CSS media @ print
← Previous message | No next message


>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?

Ed,

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
___________________________________________
Kevin H. Spruill AWA/CNTR/FAA
FAA Section 508 Technical Support
202.385.8059