- From: George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:27:39 -0700
- To: "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net>, "WAI List" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Dear All, PDF, as I understand it, is a specification controlled by Adobe. Microsoft Word is a file specification that is controlled by Microsoft. Many companies have file specifications for their proprietary applications. Even if these are published, they are not developed or maintained in the same way as standards setting bodies, such as the W3C, maintain and develop recommendations. I frequently find that changes in file specifications of proprietary applications are modified without public notice and companies that attempt to support these published specifications are frustrated in their attempts to support the file specs. There is a process within the W3C where recommendations are reviewed for accessibility, but I do not know that file specifications of proprietary specifications are ever reviewed for similar accessibility concerns. I believe that access to PDF is provided by converting the PDF into something else, like HTML. This may be explicit, as in the conversion filter that Adobe graciously provides, or it may take place in memory of an adaptive piece of software. In either case, the PDF is not natively accessible, but the conversion that takes place *may* make the document accessible. In my limited knowledge of PDF, many documents can be converted successfully. Others fail miserably. The use of Marked PDF is a good attempt to provide more semantic information about the structure and content of the document (a basic premise of XML and other descriptive markup languages such as SGML) to assist programs that manipulate the PDF as it is transformed. However, consider extremely complex documents that need to be presented to persons with print disabilities. Will PDF ever present semantically rich documents to persons with disabilities? There is an activity in the W3C moving towards the semantic web. I feel that PDF will not be used for such a forward thinking use of information. I personally feel that PDF is great for what it does and I applaud Adobe for their efforts to make their proprietary specification more usable by persons with disabilities. I also congratulate those providers of Access Technologies for making Microsoft Word and other types of applications accessible. However, I think it is important to recognize the difference between this type of access and the inherent accessibility that is designed into information standards such as those developed by the W3C and other standards setting bodies. Best George George Kerscher, Senior Officer, Accessible Information Recording For the Blind & Dyslexic (RFB&D) http://www.rfbd.org Project Manager to the DAISY Consortium http://www.daisy.org Chair Open eBook Forum (OeBF) http://www.openebook.org Co-chair WAI Steering Counsel http://www.w3.org/wai Email: kerscher@montana.com Phone: +1 406/549-4687
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 22:23:05 UTC