W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2015

RE: PDF accessibility guidelines. WAS: Re: PDF's and Signatures

From: <accessys@smart.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 14:23:45 -0500 (EST)
To: Howard Leicester <howard_leicester@btconnect.com>
cc: "'Duff Johnson'" <duff@duff-johnson.com>, "'Adam Cooper'" <cooperad@bigpond.com>, "'WAI Interest Group'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.1501271412560.30408@cygnus.smart.net>

personally ANYTHING that makes this world wide web accessible to as many 
people as possible is a good thing.

I am not opposed to pdf in and of itself, I am opposed to pdf being 
misused and adobe claiming it is accessible when to be so requires a lot 
of work and in many cases the expenditure of money (and the making of it 
accessible in linux is difficult at best, had to include open source 

I don't see pdf being developed in a fully accessible manner, and 
certainly not in a free and open manner.  remember the ADA in the USA 
prohibits accessibility costing anything extra over and above what it 
cost's everyone else.  If it requires purchasing proprietary software to 
be usable is this not a "surcharge" on people with disabilities.

Linux has a strong working group to make and keep linux "free" and 

instead of saying "yes it is" "no it's not" we should be saying "HOW"??

and I would suspect most folks here are quite computer savy, but what 
about j, doe disabled person living on disability penson using a second 
hand donated computer and a narrow band width connection to the web,  do 
not they also have a right to accessible content?

This above all else is our mission,

can j, doe using ubuntu on a dial up modem read the document in say lynx?


On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, Howard Leicester wrote:

> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 19:04:45 +0000
> From: Howard Leicester <howard_leicester@btconnect.com>
> To: 'Duff Johnson' <duff@duff-johnson.com>,
>     'Adam Cooper' <cooperad@bigpond.com>
> Cc: 'WAI Interest Group' <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> Subject: RE: PDF accessibility guidelines. WAS: Re: PDF's and Signatures
> Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 19:05:29 +0000
> Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Please don't change the thread.
> I'm looking to see if WAI take it on.
> I'm deafblind in the UK and doing my best to get 'accessibility' as central
> to healthcare.
> I've followed the 'tooings and froings' on PDF etc.
> My conclusion, and advice to the british National Health Service is "hold
> your guns" it all looks an uncoordinated mess out there.
> But! I think WAI may be the best option.
> Perhaps we should be more positive constructive and helpful?
> Best,
> Howard (Kent, UK).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Duff Johnson [mailto:duff@duff-johnson.com]
> Sent: 27 January 2015 15:15
> To: Adam Cooper
> Cc: WAI Interest Group
> Subject: Re: PDF accessibility guidelines. WAS: Re: PDF's and Signatures
> Hi Adam,
>> I'd very much like to continue this discussion, but I'm not sure this is
> the right format? Any ideas?
> I'm not sure it's the wrong forum; I kind of thought this was a good place
> to discuss matters pertaining to web accessibility, and so far as I can tell
> the discussion thus far has been very civilized.
> Feel free to email me offline you if wish. Or, perhaps start a few thread
> specific to your question / concern.
> Duff.
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2015 19:38:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:54 UTC