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

Re: PDF accessibility and complex script languages.

From: Andrew Cunningham <andj.cunningham@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 23:08:05 +1100
Message-ID: <CAOUP6KmXw365MX9V+Tu95QyqGV6EmHnrXKPuXz8rZemC_jRofg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Cc: "jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com" <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Andrew Cunningham
andj.cunningham@gmail.com

On 6 January 2016 at 02:22, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:

> If actual text can’t be used then I’d love to know where one should
> correct OCR’d text that was incorrectly identified by Adobe Acrobat during
> the OCR process but is not flagged as an OCR suspect/error.  Where might a
> user fix the OCR text?  Is there is some contents key in the tag editor
> where this can be corrected?
>
>
>
> Assuming that the OCR’d text has been embedded in the file as invisible
> text, then that text is what should be corrected.  Trying to override it
> using anything else is incorrect and shouldn’t be done at a tagging level.
> AWK
>

Interesting, does invisible text contain the same limitations as visible
text, or is invisible text different to visible text, other than just the
visibility factor?

Does invisible text require ToUnicode mappings like visible text does? if
it doesn’t (ie invisible Text is a different beast to visible text) then I
can see why ActualText is unnecessary.
Received on Wednesday, 6 January 2016 12:08:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 29 January 2016 16:39:04 UTC