E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 2 (In chronological order)

From: Kevin Spruill
Date: Thu, Apr 04 2002 2:22PM
Subject: RE: .pdf files and accessibility
No previous message | Next message →

Interestingly enough - the access.adobe.com website provides HTML, and
plain-text versions of most of the documentation re: Acrobat and
Accessibility (glean what you will from that simple fact) - along with
documentation on how to convert PDF's to accessible plain html.

I'd have to agree - the level of effort required to generate accessible
pdf's is still fairly prohibitive in my opinion (only because I can
crank out an accessible html version of even the most complex layouts a
lot quicker than jumping through multiple hoops, ya know?). While the an
html version isn't "necessary" per se - I'd consider it the necessary
other half of the equation to ensure that the information is accessible
to all.



Kevin Spruill
National Library of Medicine
OCCS
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
(301) 402-9708
(301) 402-0367 (fax)
www.nlm.nih.gov

>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = 04/03/02 07:26PM >>>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Rew [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
>
> Well, we are using Adobe 5.xx PDF files with mixed results.
> When the screen
> reader user is running the accessible Adobe reader and the
> PDF has been made
> accessible they work well with Jaws 4.0. But, many people
> who generate PDF
> documents are not aware of accessibility or are not trained
> properly in how to
> make PDF files accessible. So, our agency is having Adobe
> provide in-house
> training on generating accessible documents and forms. I'm
> hoping this will
> make it possible to provide all of our documents accessible
> for all disabled
>users.
>
> I will keep this list informed how well our efforts go with
> accessibility and
>PDF.

Are Adobe 5.xx PDFs accessible to other AT besides the more recent
versions
of JAWS and Window-Eyes? Even if the accessibility features of PDFs
have
improved, isn't an alternate version (HTML?)of the information still
necessary to provide accessibility to the largest possible audience?

I've been able to create PDFs that test well with Micro-Eyes. However,
I'm
beginning to think that the amount of time it took to "Make Accessible"

documents with complex layouts would be better spent in creating
accessible
HTML versions of the PDFs.

Any thoughts/answers/information anyone can provide is greatly
appreciated.
Thanks.

Israel Pinto
Advanced Performance Consulting Group
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >


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


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

From: Prof Norm Coombs
Date: Thu, Apr 04 2002 2:41PM
Subject: RE: .pdf files and accessibility
← Previous message | No next message

Kevin:

Your observation about the Adobe access page is very convincing!
Norm Coombs
CEO EASI
http://easi.cc
At 04:22 PM 4/4/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Interestingly enough - the access.adobe.com website provides HTML, and
>plain-text versions of most of the documentation re: Acrobat and
>Accessibility (glean what you will from that simple fact) - along with
>documentation on how to convert PDF's to accessible plain html.
>
>I'd have to agree - the level of effort required to generate accessible
>pdf's is still fairly prohibitive in my opinion (only because I can
>crank out an accessible html version of even the most complex layouts a
>lot quicker than jumping through multiple hoops, ya know?). While the an
>html version isn't "necessary" per se - I'd consider it the necessary
>other half of the equation to ensure that the information is accessible
>to all.
>
>
>
>Kevin Spruill
>National Library of Medicine
>OCCS
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>(301) 402-9708
>(301) 402-0367 (fax)
>www.nlm.nih.gov
>
>>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = 04/03/02 07:26PM >>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Rew [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
>>
>> Well, we are using Adobe 5.xx PDF files with mixed results.
>> When the screen
>> reader user is running the accessible Adobe reader and the
>> PDF has been made
>> accessible they work well with Jaws 4.0. But, many people
>> who generate PDF
>> documents are not aware of accessibility or are not trained
>> properly in how to
>> make PDF files accessible. So, our agency is having Adobe
>> provide in-house
>> training on generating accessible documents and forms. I'm
>> hoping this will
>> make it possible to provide all of our documents accessible
>> for all disabled
>>users.
>>
>> I will keep this list informed how well our efforts go with
>> accessibility and
>>PDF.
>
>Are Adobe 5.xx PDFs accessible to other AT besides the more recent
>versions
>of JAWS and Window-Eyes? Even if the accessibility features of PDFs
>have
>improved, isn't an alternate version (HTML?)of the information still
>necessary to provide accessibility to the largest possible audience?
>
>I've been able to create PDFs that test well with Micro-Eyes. However,
>I'm
>beginning to think that the amount of time it took to "Make Accessible"
>
>documents with complex layouts would be better spent in creating
>accessible
>HTML versions of the PDFs.
>
>Any thoughts/answers/information anyone can provide is greatly
>appreciated.
>Thanks.
>
>Israel Pinto
>Advanced Performance Consulting Group
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>
>
>----
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
>visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>
>----
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
>visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>


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