Re: Accessibility of Archieved items

Andrew Cunningham
andj.cunningham@gmail.com

On 7 June 2016 at 23:35, Herin Hentry <hhentry@planittesting.com> wrote:


> As per Australian digital transformation standard,
>
>
>    - The desktop environment now provides sufficient support for PDF.
>
> I have my doubts ... my gut reaction is that it depends on languages and
writing systems (scripts) involved, and I do know that a percentage of PDFs
generated by Federal and State departments and agencies in community
languages can and do fail. Additionally PDF accessibility is not jus a
content issue developer issue. How a website enables indexing and search
for PDf files is also an accessibility issue, in the sense you can do
everything right in creating the PDF, but not be able to search it.


>
>    - The mobile environment provides insufficient support for PDF to
>    claim WCAG 2.0 conformance.
>    - Ideally, Agencies should publish documents in HTML, with an
>    accessible PDF optionally provided.
>
> This applies to Archived PDFs as well.
>
> I am interesting in knowing if any other jurisdictions have any
> exclusions. If anyone is aware of any such exclusions, can you please reply
> to this thread?
>
> Thank you,
> Herin
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 7 June 2016 10:59:49 PM
> *To:* WAI Interest Group
> *Subject:* RE: Accessibility of Archieved items
>
>
> Ø  Can anyone please help me with the requirement about the accessibility
> of Archived items like blog posts, documents etc? Is this mandatory for
> WCAG 2.0?
>
>
>
> Herin, conformance to WCAG 2 for archival content is dependent on the
> applicable laws and standards that apply to your organization.  WCAG 2 is a
> set of international voluntary consensus standards.  From a WCAG 2.0
> perspective there are no exceptions for types of archival content.
> Organizations, countries, etc. often take/adopt the WCAG 2 guidelines or
> similar and turn them into requirements.  So it really depends on the
> jurisdiction.  In the US there are often exceptions for archival content,
> e.g. in the Section 508 standards and in proposed standards under the ADA.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> Jonathan Avila
>
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
>
> 703.637.8957 (Office)
> Visit us online: Website <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/> | Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/SSBBARTGroup> | Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/ssbbartgroup> | Linkedin
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog
> <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/>
>
> Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars!
> <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/webinars/>
>
>
>
> *From:* Herin Hentry [mailto:hhentry@planittesting.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 07, 2016 8:35 AM
> *To:* WAI Interest Group
> *Cc:* Herin Hentry
> *Subject:* Accessibility of Archieved items
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Can anyone please help me with the requirement about the accessibility of
> Archived items like blog posts, documents etc? Is this mandatory for WCAG
> 2.0?
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> *Herin*
>