Re: Accessing PDFs

and we are now really going off the mark.  let's examine the
accessibility of pdf briefly.  if everything is perfect, how many people
out of all the disabled people there are can access these documents with
the technology they use?  Now, I ask you, is that accessible?

Now, let's look at other modern formats such as xml or xhtml this can be
made inaccessible as can html but in its accessible form, it is a lot
easier to get into the hands of the disabled population than
"accessible" pdf.

I would only go so far as to say "propperly marked up pdf.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Smith" <aaron@gwmicro.com>
To: "David Poehlman" <poehlman1@comcast.net>; "kestrell"
<aeryadne@theworld.com>; "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net>
Cc: "RUST Randal" <RRust@COVANSYS.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: Accessing PDFs


So, in other words, we should never embrace new technology because older
technology already exists? In my opinion, that's a stifling point of
view
that will never assist in advancing the accessibility market. That line
of
thinking is part of the reason that accessibility isn't more mainstream.
If, instead of pushing the envelope, we sit back and say, "The heck with
it. I'll just use what I already have," then we might as well give up.

What's the point of moving from Windows 9X to XP, IE 5 to IE 6, Office
2000
to Office XP? Because the latter products have more/better accessibility
built in, as well as more general features. Same thing with PDFs.
Originally, there were not accessible at all. Now they are accessible.
Maybe not 100% of them 100% of the time, but to say, "It's not perfect,
so
let's not use it" violates the whole direction of accessibility
advocacy.

At 12:21 PM 10/24/2002 -0400, David Poehlman wrote:

>the problem with this logic is that it totally misses the mark when
>those documents can just as well be much more accessible by not being
in
>pdf.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Aaron Smith" <aaron@gwmicro.com>
>To: "kestrell" <aeryadne@theworld.com>; "Access Systems"
><accessys@smart.net>
>Cc: "RUST Randal" <RRust@COVANSYS.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:02 AM
>Subject: Re: Accessing PDFs
>
>
>The point is that we had to start somewhere. I know for a fact that the
>IRS
>are working on accessible PDFs, as are other government agencies. The
>more
>we spread the information that there is a way to make PDFs accessible,
>the
>better the chances that those practices will become mainstream.
>
>At 07:29 AM 10/24/2002 -0400, kestrell wrote:
>
>
> >It is also worth noting where the quote accessible unquote pdf docs
>are:
> >Of course the screen reader manuals are accessible, because any
company
> >who produced a pdf doc that had any relation to screen readers and
did
>not
> >assure it was accessible would be crazy, though there are a lot of
>crazy
> >company decisions out there. Places to check for accessible pdf docs
>would
> >be government web sites, such as the IRS web site, or materials
online
>at
> >university libraries, or just about any eBook sold in the pdf format.
>The
> >rate of inaccessibility just sky-rocketed to about eighty percent
>there.
> >
> >kestrell
>
>--
>To insure that you receive proper support, please include all
>past correspondence (where applicable), and any relevant
>information pertinent to your situation when submitting a
>problem report to the GW Micro Technical Support Team.
>
>Aaron Smith
>GW Micro
>Phone: 260/489-3671
>Fax: 260/489-2608
>WWW: http://www.gwmicro.com
>FTP: ftp://ftp.gwmicro.com
>Technical Support & Web Development

--
To insure that you receive proper support, please include all
past correspondence (where applicable), and any relevant
information pertinent to your situation when submitting a
problem report to the GW Micro Technical Support Team.

Aaron Smith
GW Micro
Phone: 260/489-3671
Fax: 260/489-2608
WWW: http://www.gwmicro.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.gwmicro.com
Technical Support & Web Development

Received on Saturday, 26 October 2002 07:33:23 UTC