Sitewide
RSS Feed:
|
By: Peter Abrahams, Practice Leader - Accessibility and Usability, Bloor Research Published: 22nd July 2008 Copyright Bloor Research © 2008 |
I recently wrote a blog: Standards must be accessible, in which I complained that a standards document on accessible documents was not itself accessible. Adobe had promised to create an accessible version which they have duly done. I have been sent a copy of the document but, as I write, this document has not been put up on the website so you are going to have to believe some of the comments below.
I ran it against the Adobe accessibility test and it came up clean so why is the document still not really accessible? The problem is that the Adobe test ensures that it has sufficient tags to enable a screen reader to navigate around the document and read all the text. However, there are two other types of problems that may make the document inaccessible:
Let us look at some examples in the Adobe version of the document. This list is based on comments made by the British Dyslexia Association and my own experience:
I am sure that this is not a complete list of the accessibility issues with the particular document and I would appreciate comments from my readers suggesting other similar issues with pdf documents. But this list is long enough to show that there is still a problem. It appear to me that there is a need for:
It would be really useful if pressure for these changes came from the standards organisations including CEN.
We are no longer accepting comments against this item. We suggest contacting the author directly.
22nd July 2008: 'Ian Litterick' said:
You are absolutely right about the need for such documents to have accessibility built in. Jisc have produced some useful guidelines on accessibility in general and PDFs in particular at http://www.techdis.ac.uk/index.php?p=3_20. They could do with more consideration of some of the issues you list as raised by the BDA New Technologies Committee.
Author training on accessibility and especially to use MS Word Styles is also vital.
And we need better editing tools that help to encourage accessibility through what I have called "Incidental Obligatory Accessibility (IOA)". Then it becomes a matter of routine, at practically zero cost and with the added bonus of better usability and better web SEO performance.
24th July 2008: 'E.A. Draffan' said:
I would like to support Ian's comment and to add there is sometimes a muddle between Read Out Loud, that has never been intended to cope with text in the same way as a screen reader (that may be necessary for all computer use if one is blind) and also PDFaloud that comes from TextHelp and provides selective reading with highlighting of text.
More support for accurate use of tagging would also be a bonus, as it is possible to solve the problem of incorrect reading order but it takes time!
28th July 2008: 'Peter Abrahams' (Author) said:
When I wrote this article I was using Adobe Reader 8.
I have since upgraded to Reader 9 and the problems I was having with reflow have gone away.
I will write a fuller review of Acrobat 9 in the coming weeks as there are several accessibility improvements include in the release.
The messages above were all contributed by IT-Director.com readers. Whilst we take care to remove any posts deemed inappropriate, we can take no responsibility for these comments. If you would like a comment removed please contact our editorial team.
Published by: IT Analysis Communications Ltd.
T: +44 (0)203 051 5760 | F: +44 (0)870 345 9922