W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2016

Re: Conforming to WCAG 2.0 SC 2.4.5 (Multiple Ways) for pdf files

From: Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:28:55 +0200
To: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "Duff Johnson" <duff@duff-johnson.com>
Message-ID: <op.yjysihwvs7agh9@widsith.local>
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 16:49:58 +0200, Duff Johnson <duff@duff-johnson.com>  
wrote:

>> What about EPUB, this is based upon HTML. Shouldn’t it also have the  
>> same requirements as PDF?
>
> EPUB comes in “reflowable” and “fixed-layout” models. You choose which  
> you prefer when you author the file.
>
> The reflowable model is (effectively) a single web-page, so web-page  
> conventions apply.
>
> The fixed-layout model raises the same questions, in terms of how to  
> apply WCAG 2.0 (which only talks about “web pages”) as does, PDF, DOCX,  
> etc. I share Jonathan’s curiosity on this point.

I think the simple answer is "this doesn't apply".

I believe the purpose was to support navigation through "strict  
hierarchy", and by search.

In a public web site that can be indexed by a search engine this is  
trivial. In a closed website, there needs to be two different paths to  
arrive at any page that isn't a step in a process.

While I look at actual navigation paths, and whether they are confusing or  
hide things, since I don't need to do formal conformance evaluations but  
merely consider the actual accessibility of content, I am happy to ignore  
this criterion.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
  chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Saturday, 2 July 2016 08:30:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 2 July 2016 08:30:06 UTC