- From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 10:13:34 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Duff, thank you for responding. I have several points of discussion below: > I understand the concern, especially given current-generation AT, which doesn't do anything with artifacts Yes, as we agree currently there doesn't appear to be any support for Artifacts by screen readers including the Read Out Loud tool in Acrobat. WCAG 2 requires "accessibility supported" methods. From http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibilit y-support-head "When new technologies are introduced, two things must happen in order for people using assistive technologies to be able to access them. First, the technologies must be designed in a way that user agents including assistive technologies could access all the information they need to present the content to the user. Secondly, the user agents and assistive technologies may need to be redesigned or modified to be able to actually work with these new technologies." While you make a good point that page labels can be used, some information in headers/footers cannot be captured in page labels. For example, documents may repeat the chapter name at the top of all pages in a chapter. This assist users who can read print in knowing what chapter a page is within. > PDF/UA requires conforming AT to be able to report artifacts to the user on request. One challenge for people who cannot see the page is knowing when to request the information. For example, if a header contains the word "Classified" users should be informed/reminded of this without requiring them to manually request this information. A user setting would be needed with assistive technology to accommodate all user needs as some people would not want this information. But simply allowing for something on demand won't provide the same experience to users without print disabilities that can immediately see/obtain header and footer information. > Including page headers and footers in the logical structure is plainly wrong; this content isn't part of the document. Page header and footer content is "metadata for the physical page" - no more. Including such artifacts in the logical structure would not necessarily advise users of page-numbers (because it's "just a number" out of context) and certainly, would routinely introduce confusing breaks in the logical flow, sometimes occurring within words, sentences or paragraphs. While I agree most footer and header information is metadata related to the page or document, there may be things in the header and footer that need to be structured. For example, a footer could contain a link -- how could this information be structured if it was an artifact? Additionally, footnote information is indicated by PDF/UA to be a note element with the logical structure of the document - and footnotes break the flow of the logical structure as well. Document metadata is also not very accessible to users with disabilities. For example, if the page contained metadata such as form numbers, users of screen readers would need to access the document properties dialog and hunt for this information while the same information is provided instantaneously to users who see the printed page. We need to find an equivalent manner to inform and allow the user to access the page meta data in an reasonable manner. It sounds like the current PDF specification doesn't allow for this -- but users need access to the information today. Jonathan
Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 14:13:59 UTC