Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /kunden/567486_14057/tst.pdfv.org/wp-content/plugins/Ultimate-Premium-Plugin/usm_premium_icons.php on line 520
About the contributor

Susana De Abrew
http://tst.pdfv.org/member-description/foxit-corporation/ ()
Foxit Corporation


No bio information provided.

Duff Johnson
PDF Association

A veteran of the electronic document space, Duff Johnson is an independent consultant, Executive Director of the PDF Association and ISO Project co-Leader (and US TAG chair) for ISO 32000 and ISO 14289.

Alexandra Oettler
PDF Association

No bio information provided.

Thomas Zellmann
http://tst.pdfv.org/member-description/foxit-corporation/ ()
Foxit Corporation

Thomas Zellmann has been working in electronic data processing (EDP) for more than 30 years and has extensive experience with classic and modern IT solutions. Prior to joining LuraTech/Foxit in 2001 he worked for Softmatic AG, Software AG and Nixdorf among others. As Managing Director of the PDF Association Thomas coordinates and executes many of the organization activities.

Nicole Gauger

No bio information provided.

PDF Association


More contributions
PDF Association mit erweitertem Vorstand

Berlin. Der neu gewählte Vorstand der PDF Assocation setzt sich aus elf Mitgliedern zusammen. Neu hinzugekommen sind mit Catherine Andersz, PDFTron Systems, und Alaine Behler, iText Software, zwei anerkannte Marketingexpertinnen. Darüber hinaus bereich …

Test callas
Test callas
Rückblick auf die PDF Days Europe 2018 im Postmaster-Magazin

Das Postmaster-Magazin hat in seiner aktuellen Ausgabe einen Nachbericht zu den PDF Days Europe veröffentlicht, den Sie hier nachlesen können.

Videoaufzeichnungen und Präsentationen der PDF Days Europe 2018 jetzt verfügbar!

Sie haben die PDF Days Europe 2018 verpasst? Kein Problem! Hier finden Sie alle 32 spannenden Vorträge der PDF Days Europe 2018!

Verwendung von PDF/UA in Barrierefreiheitschecklisten
Eine Montage von Zugänglichkeitschecklisten: Organisationen, die dafür sorgen sollen, dass ihre elektronischen Inhalte zugänglich sind, interessieren sich nicht wirklich für die technischen Details. Sie brauchen einfache Lösungen, brauchbare Workflows, zuverlässige Ergebnisse und rechenschaftspflichtige Systeme. In der gesamten US-Bundesregierung müssen diese Behörden die Anforderungen an die Zugänglichkeit erfüllen: Section 508, die unter anderem die WCAG 2.0 Level AA als Standard festlegt. Viele andere Regierungen weltweit verwenden ebenfalls WCAG 2.0, und zunehmend wird es auch in kommerziellen Umgebungen eingesetzt, um die Zugänglichkeit für behinderte Menschen zu verbessern. Der Prozess zur Sicherstellung der Zugänglichkeit der Inhalte erfordert eine umfangreiche Schulung, eine angemessene Software und ausreichend Zeit für das Personal. Alles, was dazu beiträgt, diesen Prozess zu rationalisieren, Kosten zu senken oder die Verbesserung der Zugänglichkeit oder Validierung von mehr Inhalten zu erleichtern, ist von Interesse. Übersetzt mit www.DeepL.com/Translator

Using PDF/UA in accessibility checklists

A montage of accessibility checklists.Organizations tasked with ensuring their electronic content is accessible aren’t really interested in the technical details. They need straightforward solutions, usable workflows, reliable results and accountable systems.

Throughout the US federal government the accessibility requirement these agencies must meet is Section 508, which itself identifies WCAG 2.0 Level AA as its standard, among other requirements.

Many other governments worldwide also use WCAG 2.0, and increasingly, it’s being adopted in commercial settings engaged in improving their accessibility to disabled populations.

As an operational matter, the process of assuring that content is accessible involves substantial training, adequate software and sufficient staff-time. Anything that helps streamline this process, reduces costs, or facilitates accessibility upgrades or validation in more content, is of interest.

PDF’s place in document technology

PDF remains indispensable. A recent analysis presented at PDF Days Europe 2018 concluded that 1 in 20 static web pages was a PDF file. But the web holds just a small fraction of documents. Trillions of PDF files exist in private collections as the embodiment of documentation, contracts, invoices, statements, policies, records, terms, maps, academic papers and so many more applications.

PDF and accessibility testing

Due to PDF’s inherent flexibility, the testing required to account for the potential variety of content in PDF files can be substantial. PDF/UA, the ISO specification for accessible PDF, packages these requirements together and includes (according to the Matterhorn Protocol) 136 distinct tests for accessible PDF files.

This might seem daunting. Which is unfortunate, because it should be liberating.

PDF/UA and accessibility testing

Of the 136 tests described in the Matterhorn Protocol, 87 may be fully automated with software. Human intervention is only required to assess and correct any errors located by software.

The 47 checks that may require human judgement boil down to:

  • Confirming that the document’s semantics as indicated by the tags are accurate
  • Confirming that the order of semantic content is logical
  • Confirming that any role-mappings in use are valid
  • Several checks that apply equally to other forms of content (color, contrast, metadata, alternate text for images, language)
  • Checks pertaining to JavaScript, or other content-specific checks

All of these tests may be performed very efficiently by software designed for PDF/UA validation. For example. it’s possible to perform most of these tests via a quick review of pages and tags.

Applying PDF/UA to accessibility-validation processes allows one to package sets of tests together, streamlining the validation process.

Use PDF/UA to simplify the process

If agencies can learn to use the PDF/UA indicator, accessibility checklists can get a lot easier. Authors and vendors could leverage PDF/UA as part of a declaration of conformance ( VPAT in Section 508 jargon)  for each document. Deliverables specifications might then be summarized as:

  • PDF/UA conformance (as certified by the vendor or provider, and spot-tested by the procuring agency).
  • Policy requirements (i.e., the gap between PDF/UA and the standard you need to meet). Such requirements might include (as examples):
    • application of specific WCAG 2.0 Success Criteria that are desirable in addition to qualities covered by PDF/UA
    • restrictions in terms of fonts or font-sizes used
    • generalized requirements for the use of simple tables
    • any other specific policy

This approach would set clear, consumable expectations and reduce testing complexity to help drive achievement of organizational accessibility objectives.

Categories: PDF/UA, Perspective, Standards adoption