RE: Should PDF documents have headers and footers on every page?

David, this approach sounds good to me.

Jonathan

--
Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group
jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com<mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>

703-637-8957 (o)
Follow us: Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/#%21/ssbbartgroup> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/#%21/SSBBARTGroup> | LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter<http://eepurl.com/O5DP>

From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 8:36 AM
To: Jonathan Avila; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Katie Haritos-Shea; Kerstin Probiesch
Cc: WCAG
Subject: Re: Should PDF documents have headers and footers on every page?

PS

To be clear, Kerstin's proposed failure has the following qualities:

* It does not require footers to be marked up as artifacts, only that the information be available or programmatically determinable at least once in the document.
* It allows for Jonathan's recommendations regarding exposing page numbers and other changing information
* It allows for my preference of exposing header and footer information in the main body as section headings, synced page numbers etc..
* It allows for Allen's preference to have footer's inline
* It does not infringe on Gregg's WCAG2ICT concern about full PDF documents mapping to a web page
* It is oriented towards the the PDF/UA's requirement of marking them up as artifact's but is not limited by it, for things such as Jonathan's exceptions above
For pastoral direction on the best way to provide headers and footers. Technique PDF 14 can be amended to address all of our concerns because it is a technique and not a failure. It can provide the best practice, and provide example edge cases.


Cheers,

David MacDonald



CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

www.Can-Adapt.com<http://www.Can-Adapt.com>



  Adapting the web to all users
            Including those with disabilities

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 7:44 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca<mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>> wrote:
>>To clarify. I have been told by PDF/UA experts that to artifact a link even in a footer would be a violation of PDF/UA.

7.18.5 requires links be marked up as a link element. Section 7.8 requires all headers and footers be marked up as artifacts. So it appears PDF/UA does not allow links in headers and footers.

>>Also an artifacted link would be an issue for a screen reader user as it would produce a dead tab stop

True
I would like to try to gain consensus among us. I like Kirsten's failure proposal and I think it is consistent with WCAG and is reasonably compatible with PDF/UA.
Thoughts?



Cheers,

David MacDonald



CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613.235.4902<tel:613.235.4902>

LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

www.Can-Adapt.com<http://www.Can-Adapt.com>



  Adapting the web to all users
            Including those with disabilities

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 7:04 AM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com<mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>> wrote:
> I put a link in a MS Word footer, and exported it. It appears to be marked as an artifact, even though it can receive tab focus.

To clarify. I have been told by PDF/UA experts that to artifact a link even in a footer would be a violation of PDF/UA.    Also an artifacted link would be an issue for a screen reader user as it would produce a dead tab stop

Jon

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 10, 2015, at 9:28 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca<mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>> wrote:
>
> I put a link in a MS Word footer, and exported it. It appears to be marked as an artifact, even though it can receive tab focus.