- From: Waddell, Cynthia <cynthia.waddell@ci.sj.ca.us>
- Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:15:28 -0700
- To: "'Dave J Woolley'" <DJW@bts.co.uk>, "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Mr. Woolley, The problem with PDF at this time is that screenreaders are unable to read the text as well as fill in the forms of PDF documents. This is the basis for the US disability rights concern that the PDF form prevents "effective communication" under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)and serves to effectively discriminate against people with disabilities utilizing screenreader applications. Adobe has committed to finding ways to incorporate structure into a PDF document upon creation and we all welcome that effort. The first website ADA complaint against the City of San Jose was precisely because we had posted our city counsel documents in PDF format. As a result, my office had to develop an accessible web design policy in 1995 to manage ADA complaints. The outcome was a compromise. If City webmanagers posted a document in PDF, they also had to post an equivalent accessible document in HTML. This policy has been adopted by the US Department of Justice - the enforcement authority for the ADA - and is consistent with current practices of the USDOJ and the US Access Board. Again, I am sure that all of us are looking forward to Adobe improving their product. Until then, disability discrimination laws will continue to be the basis for complaints filed against covered entities posted documents and forms only in PDF. Thankfully, the accessibility effort is not totally reliant upon Adobe. It is extremely helpful that the W3C WAI has approached accessible web issues from multiple fronts - not only through the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines but also through the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines and the Web Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines. Developers of screenreaders will benefit enormously from the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines. As you probably know, some of the benefits of the User Agent Guidelines include improved inter-operability, functionality and accessibility helps. I apologize for this long post. Best regards, Cynthia Waddell --------------------------------------------------- Cynthia D. Waddell ADA Coordinator City Manager Department City of San Jose, CA USA 801 North First Street, Room 460 San Jose, CA 95110-1704 (408)277-4034 (408)971-0134 TTY (408)277-3885 FAX http://www.icdri.org/cynthia_waddell.htm -----Original Message----- From: Dave J Woolley [mailto:DJW@bts.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 3:57 AM To: 'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org' Subject: RE: PDF Alternatives? > From: Waddell, Cynthia [SMTP:cynthia.waddell@ci.sj.ca.us] > > It is not necessarily true that a person who is blind or has low vision > would require assistance in completing a form. If you noted the Section > 508 > proposed rule, an online form designed to be accessible would enable > someone > using a screenreader to fill out the form. > [DJW:] I don't see that this is particular incompatible with PDF. In fact PDF text is more likely to be real text than the text on typical commercial web pages. The only real problem with the text in PDF files is it is often produced by word processors that think they can do a better job of spacing characters than PostScript can do. That means that you normally get individually placed characters, rather than whole words with a horzontal stretch factor, as allowed by the PDF primitives. This can confuse tools that try to extract words from the text (I predict that the same problem will happen with SVG if, as I suspect, people use it for whole pages, not just graphics). (It seems to me that there is a place for tools to help marginally reformat PDF to take out the detailed microspacing and replace it by stretch factors. It's possible they are already in the commercial Acrobat toolset.) PDF does have a fill the forms facility, even in the version before last of Acrobat, and you can print the result. This is not an ideal example from a size or accessibility point of view, but it does demonstrate the feature - it needs the latest Acrobat reader: http://planetary.org/UPDATES/seti/seti@home_certificate1.pdf (please destroy any printout if you are not a participant!). Once you impose a constraint that the layout should exactly match that of the printed form, I think PDF becomes the format of choice. -- --------------------------- DISCLAIMER --------------------------------- Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.
Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2000 12:16:47 UTC