Re: Comments on PDF Techniques doc

I did not say that the entire document should be moved to ATAG.  What I 
said was that there are sections that discuss what output should be 
generated which clearly falls into ATAG.  The tips for people using Adobe 
tools to generate PDF should clearly stay as WCAG techniques.

--w

At 08:20 PM 5/16/01 , Jason White wrote:
>A quick response to one of Wendy's comments:
>
>The division between WCAG and Authoring Tools has always been, as I
>understand it, approximately as follows: WCAG defines what the correct
>markup/data representation should be; AU defines how an authoring tool
>should prompt the user, what checks it should perform on the document for
>the purpose of validating accessibility, etc.
>
>Thus in so far as the PDF techniques are intended to explain what is meant
>by an accessible PDF file (how content should be represented in it), they
>belong within the scope of WCAG. Although PDF is generally produced by
>tools rather than direct keyboard entry, this is no reason to move the PDF
>techniques out of our working group's scope. Perhaps it should be stated
>in the document, clearly, that the techniques will be most relevant to the
>designers of PDF output software. On the other hand, there are web authors
>who will be using widely available libraries to generate PDF
>automatically, in which case the library will shield them from the
>syntactic details of the file format while still exposing the constructs
>that make up a PDF file.
>
>Actually, it would be possible to write a fully functional PDF file by
>hand in a text editor, even though no one does this in practice.

--
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
seattle, wa usa
tel: +1 206.706.5263
/--

Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2001 22:06:45 UTC