W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2016

RE: Accessible Documents - PDF vs. HTML

From: George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 08:25:16 -0600
To: "'Macintosh, Kristy \(OMAFRA\)'" <Kristy.Macintosh@ontario.ca>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <009c01d1c711$bcf37ba0$36da72e0$@montana.com>

I would recommend HTML as the basis for your accessibility efforts. We will
not know what kind of device is used for the reading and HTML will reflow to
fit the screen size used by the student. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Macintosh, Kristy (OMAFRA) [mailto:Kristy.Macintosh@ontario.ca] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 6:25 AM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Accessible Documents - PDF vs. HTML


I am looking for some advice and information. We have eLearning course
transcripts that we are working on making fully accessible (conform to WCAG
2.0 Level AA guidelines). The transcripts range in size from 30 -60 pages,
have some graphics throughout, a lot of headings and lists, and multiple
choice assessment items.


1.      What would be a better format for these transcripts? PDF or HTML and

2.      If HTML was the path we went - can we just save Word documents as
HTML files or do we need to do HTML coding in an HTML template?

a.      If saving to HTML in Word is a bad idea - why?

Kristy Macintosh
Education Coordinator - Training, Education and Communications
|Environmental Management Branch | Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and
Rural Affairs
1 Stone Rd West, 3rd Floor SW, Guelph, Ontario  N1G 4Y2
Office:  519-826-6373 | Cell: 226-821-5359 | Fax: 519-826-3259
Email:  kristy.macintosh@ontario.ca<mailto:kristy.macintosh@ontario.ca>
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2016 14:25:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 15 June 2016 14:25:52 UTC