,Je vous transfaire un message de Sylvie Duchateau, qui a fait une
traduction spontanée et je la remercie, car j'avais aussi poster sur
la liste ALLOS.
Irina
-------- Message original --------
Sujet:
Re: [ALLOS] Teste de l'accessibilité des PDF avec JAWS,
NVDA et Window-Eyes
Date :
Fri, 04 May 2012 11:22:32 +0200
De :
Sylvie Duchateau <sylvie.duchateau AT snv.jussieu.fr>
Répondre
à :
ALLOS AT yahoogroupes.fr
Organisation :
Association BrailleNet
Pour :
ALLOS AT yahoogroupes.fr
Bonjour Irina et tous,
Ce message est un peu long. C'est tout d'abord une réaction
aux messages
échangés puis un résumé de l'article.
Comme l'a dit notre colistier, le format PDF n'est pas un
format
accessible au départ puisqu'il est destiné à l'impression.
Néanmoins, comme l'écrit Irina, il est tout à fait possible
aujourd'hui
au producteur de fichiers PDF de les "baliser" et de
permettre ainsi
leur lecture qui s'effectue comme pour un document HTML (lu
avec
Firefox et ou tout autre navigateur). Si le dit document PDF
est bien
balisé, on peut le faire assez correctement avec l'export
d'Open Office
ou l'extension de Word 2007/2010 il est possible de naviguer
de titre
en titre, de lire les alternatives aux images et, si une
retouche est
faite avec Adobe Acrobat, de lire les tableaux.
Pour avoir utilisé Jaws, Window Eyes et NVDA, je peux dire
que si le
document est balisé correctement on peut le lire sans aucun
problème.
De nos jours, les documents PDF sont de plus en plus
utilisés comme
alternative au format papier : on peut télécharger son
relevé de
comptes, sa facture de téléphone et un résumé des
prestations de
sécurité sociale au format PDF. Seul ce format est considéré
comme
document "authentique" et parfois, ceux qui nous les
envoient les
protègent contre la lecture par un lecteur d'écran ce qui
nous les rend
complètement inaccessibles. Dans la plupart des cas, ils ne
sont pas
balisés.
Suite à mon expérience de lecture de PDFs, je constate qu'il
est plus
difficile de lire un PDF sous Adobe X avec Jaws, Windows
Eyes ou NVDA
qu'avec les versions précédentes.
Sous mac, il me semble que malheureusement, même si le
document PDF est
bien balisé, on ne peut pas l'explorer correctement avec
Voiceover comme
on le ferait sur une page Internet. A confirmer. Je ne
connais pas
assez Linux pour dire ce qu'il en est de la lecture de PDFs
balisés sous
cette plateforme.
Pour résumer le texte anglais envoyé par Irina :
Ces tests n'ont été faits que sous la plateforme Windows.
On constate que de plus en plus de lecteurs d'écran
permettent la
lecture d'un fichier PDF. Aujourd'hui, on n'utilise plus
seulement Jaws
et Window Eyes pour tester l'accessibilité des fichiers PDF
et des pages
Web, mais aussi NVDA et Supernova. La personne qui a testé
les
capacités des lecteurs d'écran a analysé leur capacité à
lire le titre
du document, les titres de section, les images, les signets,
les
tableaux, les formulaires, les listes et les liens .
L'analyse ne
concerne que les documents balisés.
Les tests ont été faits sous Windows 7 avec JAWS 13.0.527,
NVDA 2011.3,
Window-Eyes 7.5.3.0 et Supernova 12.07 avec Adobe Reader X.
Lecture du titre du document:
les tests ont porté sur la lecture du titre du fichier en
appuyant sur
une combinaison de touches donnée et aussi en changeant
d'application à
l'aide de la combinaison de touches alt+tab.
Jaws, Window Eyes et supernova lisent le titre correctement
dans les
deux cas.
NVDA le fait correctement quand on appuie sur alt+tab mais
lorsqu'on
appuie sur la combinaison de touches dédiée il lit:
"acrord32".
En-têtes de section :
le test a été effectué à l'aide des touches de navigation
rapide (H dans
les lecteurs d'écran anglophones) et avec l'affichage de la
liste des
titres.
Jaws, supernova et NVDA lisent les en-têtes correctement
mais pas
window-eyes qui considère les en-têtes comme du texte.
Signets:
deux choses ont été testées: navigation entre les panneaux
des signets
et le document, ainsi que le déplacement du focus à
l'emplacement du
document sélectionné.
Jaws peut naviguer entre le panneau des signets et le
document mais il
ne place pas le focus au bon endroit lorsqu'on sélectionne
un signet.
Parfois le curseur est placé au-dessus, parfois au-dessous
de l'endroit
où se trouve le signet. Visuellement, le focus est placé au
bon endroit.
NVDA se comporte de façon similaire. Le curseur est placé en
haut de la
page où se trouve le signet mais le focus visuel est placé
au bon endroit.
Supernova et Window-eyes réagissent de la même façon.
Listes: l'auteur a analysé des listes ordonnées, non
ordonnées et
imbriquées.
Jaws Nvda et supernova lisent ces listes correctement.
Window-eyes les
identifie seulement comme du texte.
Images:
plusieurs types ont été testés: images simples, décoratives
et
graphiques complexes: lus en utilisant les touches de
navigation rapides
et la lecture en continu.
Jaws et NVDA se comportent correctement.
Window eyes n'indique pas qu'il
s'agit d'une image tout en lisant l'alternative tout comme
supernova qui
n'arrive pas à identifier l'alternative lorsqu'on navigue
avec la touche
G pour passer d'un graphique à l'autre.
Les liens : test à l'aide de la touche tabulation et de la
liste des liens.
Les liens sont lus correctement par tous les lecteurs
d'écran.
Tableaux : la reconnaissance des tableaux, les en-têtes de
tableaux et
les nombres de colonnes et de lignes pour les tableaux
simples et les
tableaux complexes ont été testés.
Jaws a tout bien identifié.
NVDA, Window-eyes et Supernova reconnaissent les tableaux et
leur
structure mais ils ne reconnaissent pas les en-têtes de
tableaux bien
qu'ils soient balisés.
Formulaires:
l'identification de chaque champ en mode lecture et en mode
navigation a
été testée :
Jaws, NVDA et supernova restituent les informations
correctement.
Window-eyes la restitue bien en mode lecture
, mais il ne reconnaît pas les étiquettes des cases à cocher
en mode
formulaire et il indique que la case n'est pas cochée.
Conclusion de l'auteur :
Mis à part les liens, les résultats des tests sont
différents et
intéressants. Jaws arrive en première position, suivi de
près par NVDA
qui doit améliorer un petit nombre de points. Supernova
arrive 3e et
Window-eyes a encore beaucoup à faire.
Sylvie Duchateau
Le 03/05/2012 18:20, Irina Lambla a écrit :
>
> Bonjour, j'ai essayé de traduire le texte qui suis mais
je n'ai pas
> réussit. Alors désolée pour ceux qui ne lisent pas
l'anglais. A moins
> que quelqu'un ai envie de faire une petite traduction
:).
>
> PDF Accessibility Testing with JAWS, NVDA and
Window-Eyes
>
> Posted on March 21, 2012 <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18>
by
> priti <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?author=1>
>
> Accessibility testing of PDF files involves screen
reader testing on
> Microsoft Windows platform to a great extent. Over the
years JAWS and
> Window-Eyes were the two screen readers used for
testing PDF documents
> on Windows platform. However other screen readers, such
as NVDA,
> Supernova have joined the party and are being today
used extensively for
> testing web pages and PDF documents for accessibility.
>
> So I decided to analyze different screen readers
running on Windows
> platform for accessing and testing PDF accessibility.
Different
> elements, such as document title, headings, images,
bookmarks, tables,
> forms, lists, and links were tested with each of the
screen reader to
> understand what were their interpretation and how well
did they read a
> tagged PDF file.
>
> All the screen readers interpreted couple of things
uniformly and
> correctly; "Untagged Document" and "Document reading
Order" so the same
> were not included in the analysis.
>
> Here are my findings of the analysis carried out using
different leading
> screen readers on Windows 7 platform; JAWS 13.0.527,
NVDA 2011.3,
> Window-Eyes 7.5.3.0 and Supernova 12.07 with Adobe
Reader X for
> accessibility testing of different elements of a PDF
file.
>
> Document Title
>
> Two aspects were checked; reading the file title on
press of a keystroke
> and reading the file title while switching between
applications -- Alt +
> Tab in Windows:
>
> * JAWS: Reads the file title correctly in both the
cases.
> * NVDA: Reads the file title correctly while switching
between
> applications but fails to read the same on press of a
keystroke,
> instead reads "acrord32".
> * Window-Eyes: Reads the file title correctly in both
the cases.
> * Supernova: Reads the file title correctly in both the
cases.
>
> Headings
>
> Heading structure of the file was checked using the
quick navigation key
> 'H' and heading list utility of the screen readers:
>
> * JAWS: Reads the tagged headings correctly.
> * NVDA: Reads the tagged headings correctly.
> * Window-Eyes: Fails to identify the tagged headings
instead read them
> as plain text.
> * Supernova: Reads the tagged headings correctly.
>
> Bookmarks
>
> Two aspects were checked; navigating between the
Bookmarks pane and
> document area of Adobe Reader as well as moving focus
to the marked
> location:
>
> * JAWS: Navigation between the bookmark pane and
document area works
> fine but focus fails to move to the marked location. In
fact on
> selecting a bookmark results in focus moving
erratically on the page
> sometimes above and sometimes below the marked
location. It was
> noted that visually the focus moves to the correct
location but JAWS
> focus tends to move on the user's last position on that
page.
> * NVDA: Similar to JAWS, navigation works fine but
focus tends to move
> to the top of the page instead of the marked location.
However,
> visual focus moves to the correct location.
> * Window-Eyes: Similar to JAWS and NVDA, navigation
works fine but
> focus tends to move to the top of the page instead of
the marked
> location. However, visual focus moves to the correct
location.
> * Supernova: Similar to JAWS, NVDA and Window-Eyes,
navigation works
> fine but focus tends to move to the top of the page
instead of the
> marked location. However, visual focus moves to the
correct location.
>
> Lists
>
> Different types of lists; ordered and unordered lists
as well as nested
> lists were analyzed:
>
> * JAWS: Reads the lists and nested lists correctly.
> * NVDA: Reads the lists and nested lists correctly.
> * Window-Eyes: Fails to identify the lists and nested
list instead
> reads them as plain text.
> * Supernova: Reads the lists and nested lists
correctly.
>
> Images
>
> Different types of images, such as simple images,
decorative images and
> complex charts were tested using quick navigation key
'G' as well as
> reading the page content continuously:
>
> * JAWS: Reads the alternate text correctly.
> * NVDA: Reads the alternate text correctly.
> * Window-Eyes: Reads the alternate text but similar to
web page
> reading does not identify it as a 'Graphic' making it
difficult for
> users to differentiate it from rest of the text on the
page. A point
> to note is that it reads the alternate text on pressing
the quick
> navigation key 'G', providing users with an option to
do a bit of
> tweaking to identify the image information on the page.
> * Supernova: Reads the alternate text but does not
identify it as a
> 'Graphic' making it difficult for users to
differentiate it from
> rest of the text on the page. Also it fails to read the
alternate
> text on press of a keystroke (G).
>
> Links
>
> Links were checked with the 'Tab' key as well as using
the list of links
> utility of each screen reader:
>
> * JAWS: Reads the links correctly.
> * NVDA: Reads the links correctly.
> * Window-Eyes: Reads the links correctly.
> * Supernova: Reads the links correctly.
>
> Tables
>
> Table identification, table headers and table structure
(number of rows
> and columns) for simple as well as complex tables were
tested:
>
> * JAWS: Identified the table and its structure
correctly. Also reads
> the marked table headers correctly for simple as well
as complex
> data tables.
> * NVDA: Identified the table and its structure
correctly. However,
> fails to identify the marked table headers for simple
as well as
> complex data tables.
> * Window-Eyes: Identified the table and its structure
correctly.
> However, fails to identify the marked table headers for
simple as
> well as complex data tables.
> * Supernova: Identified the table and its structure
correctly.
> However, fails to identify the marked table headers for
simple as
> well as complex data tables.
>
> Forms
>
> Different form fields were tested in document reading
mode as well as
> Forms/Focus/Browse mode: of each of the screen readers:
>
> * JAWS: Reads the form field label, role and state
information
> correctly in both the modes.
> * NVDA: Reads the form field label, role and state
information
> correctly in both the modes.
> * Window-Eyes: Reads the form field label, role and
state information
> correctly in document reading mode but fails to read
the label of
> check boxes in 'Browse Off' mode. It reads the check
box as "Check
> box Unchecked".
> * Supernova: Reads the form field label, role and state
information
> correctly in both the modes.
>
> Conclusion
>
> Apart from links, all the eight elements analyzed
yielded different
> results which are quite interesting. All in all JAWS is
leading the pack
> when it comes to testing PDF accessibility on Windows
platform and NVDA
> is in the second position with couple of elements to
catch up with.
> Supernova is in the third position and Window-Eyes has
a long way to go.
>
> This entry was posted in Accessibility
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?category_name=accessibility>,
PDF
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?category_name=pdf>,
Screen Readers
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?category_name=screen-readers>,
Testing
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?category_name=testing>
and tagged
> Accessibility <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=accessibility>,
> Adobe Reader <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=adobe-reader>,
JAWS
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=jaws>,
Manual Testing
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=manual-testing>,
Microsoft
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=microsoft>,
NVDA
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=nvda>,
PDF
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=pdf>,
Screen Readers
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=screen-readers>,
Supernova
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=supernova>,
Testing
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=testing>,
Window-Eyes
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=window-eyes>,
Windows
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?tag=windows>.
Bookmark the permalink
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18>.
> ? Welcome to Accessibility Chatter <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=6>
>
> 23 Responses to /PDF Accessibility Testing with JAWS,
NVDA and
> Window-Eyes/
>
> 1.
> Mike Elledge says:
> March 21, 2012 at 2:19 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-7>
>
> Hi Priti--
>
> This is very helpful, especially as we discuss the
appropriate
> eDocuments policy at MSU. I do have a question: How did
you set
> focus for a particular part of the PDF document for the
Bookmarks
> test? Also, would it be possible to post the test
document so we can
> see how it's tagged? Thanks!
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=7#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=7#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 22, 2012 at 2:44 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-13>
>
> Mike, I won't be able to share the test files.
Bookmarks were
> created using the Bookmark panel & no additional
effort was put
> in to handle the focus.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=13#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=13#respond>>
> 2.
> Mike Moore says:
> March 21, 2012 at 6:23 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-8>
>
> It looks like PDF still poses significant barriers for
people who a
> blind and do not use JAWS. A couple of years ago NVDA
have better
> performance than JAWS. I would love to see similar
tests with Nova
> on Windows and with VoiceOver for the Mac. T
>
> My main takeaway from this is that HTML is still the
best way to
> ensure that content is available to everyone. I am
particularly
> disappointed in the PDF form performance, since PDF
forms are more
> useful in certain circumstances than HTML.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=8#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=8#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 22, 2012 at 2:51 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-14>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> I hope you mean 'nova' as 'Supernova' from Dolphin. I
shall try
> to add my findings for Supernova for Windows but am not
sure
> about Mac as I don't own a Mac computer so chances are
that it
> would be difficult to test the PDFs with VoiceOver as
of now but
> surely some time in the future.
> As far as forms are concerned, forms can be made
accessible but
> I agree that more effort needs to be put in for the
same. As far
> as screen readers are concerned, I was thrilled with
JAWS &
> NVDA's interpretation of tagged PDF forms.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=14#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=14#respond>>
> 3.
> Kathy Keller <http://www.dfps.state.tx.us>
says:
> March 21, 2012 at 6:52 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-9>
>
> Thank you for making this effort. This information is
interesting
> and very useful.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=9#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=9#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 22, 2012 at 2:41 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-12>
>
> It is good to know that you found the post useful
Kathy!
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=12#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=12#respond>>
> 4.
> Ryan Benson <http://blog.rbenson.info>
says:
> March 21, 2012 at 8:10 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-10>
>
> Very interesting.
>
> There are a three ways to construct bookmarks: 1- use
the bookmark
> panel. 2- Make a desination then link a bookmark to
that
> desintation. 3- use _javascript_
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=10#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=10#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 22, 2012 at 2:39 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-11>
>
> Thanks for sharing this information Ryan!
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=11#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=11#respond>>
> 5.
> Phill Jenkins <http://www.ibm.com/able>
says:
> March 22, 2012 at 3:06 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-15>
>
> Yes, we also need analysis from other screen readers
and other
> platforms, such as Nova and the VoiceOver on Mac/Safari
platform.
> And of course repeated analysis in the future (once in
March 2012
> isn't sufficient to base policy) along with
availability of the PDF
> files themselves so we can separate the PDF tagging
issues from the
> screen reader support issues, from the end user
configuration issues
> (and I'm assuming there are no platform issues).
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=15#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=15#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 24, 2012 at 8:36 am
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-21>
>
> Hi Phill, Yes I shall be adding findings for Supernova
for
> Windows but won't be able to add VoiceOver findings as
I don't
> own a Mac computer. Also I shall do repeated analysis
of the
> same in the future and shall try to make the test files
> available as well. Hope that helps...
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=21#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=21#respond>>
> o
> Jason Hester <http://www.knowbility.org>
says:
> March 26, 2012 at 4:37 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-22>
>
> Thanks Priti,
>
> This is very useful and is within my own findings using
JAWS
> and NVDA primarily for PDF testing.
>
> I agree that we should do more testing with other
> screen-readers as well including VoiceOver and maybe
even
> SAToGo.
>
> In my limited experience with VoiceOver it seems that
> headings, lists, and links read out well, but have had
some
> trouble reading tables. I am not sure if it that was
due to
> my unfamiliarity with some of VoiceOver's features.
>
> Look forward to hearing more in the future and will
> contribute my findings with other screen-readers where
I can.
>
> Reply
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=22#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=22#respond>>
> +
> priti says:
> March 27, 2012 at 11:08 am
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-24>
>
> Thanks Jason for sharing few of your VoiceOver
findings!
> Yes, I shall come up with other screen reader findings
> as suggested by you'll in the near future. I had opted
> for the 3 most widely used screen readers on the
Windows
> platform but surely would be happy to build on that.
>
> Reply
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=24#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=24#respond>>
>
> 6.
>
> Pingback: Some links for light reading (23/3/12) | Max
Design
> <http://www.maxdesign.com.au/2012/03/23/some-links-368/>
>
> 7.
> tony says:
> March 23, 2012 at 2:36 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-17>
>
> This is very useful because we are beginning to do a
review of our
> screen readers and if there are other people coming to
the same
> conclusion then I know that we are doing it right.
>
> Thanks for the post
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=17#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=17#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 24, 2012 at 8:19 am
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-19>
>
> Thanks for the words of appreciation Tony!
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=19#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=19#respond>>
> 8.
> Mal <http://v-linc.org> says:
> March 23, 2012 at 4:13 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-18>
>
> Any findings on comparing similar items with Kurzweil?
I am
> particularly interested in how to get around the
editing of scanned
> materials that tend to get laborious.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=18#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=18#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 24, 2012 at 8:31 am
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-20>
>
> Hi Mal, no findings for Kurzweil currently.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=20#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=20#respond>>
> 9.
> Gary says:
> March 26, 2012 at 9:20 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-23>
>
> As someone who uses assistive technology that ISN'T
screen reader
> software, once again, only a limited audience was
considered by
> 'accessibility experts' or consultants. What about
those of us who
> use speech recognition software? Navigating PDF forms
for us is just
> as difficult as for those who use screen readers.
Should we start
> pitting ourselves against one another (e.g., there are
more of us
> than there are of you)? Is that the implication?
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=23#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=23#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> March 27, 2012 at 11:15 am
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-25>
>
> Hi Gary,
> I completely agree with your concerns & assure that
this review
> will not be restricted to screen readers but will also
include
> other ATs and automated tools in the near future. As
we'll agree
> with "Accessibility is not only about screen readers!",
I will
> ensure that in my future posts I make it clear that
reviews
> consider all user groups and not only screen reader
users or
> visually impaired users. Apologies if it has hurt your
sentiments.
> Regards,
> Priti
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=25#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=25#respond>>
> 10.
> Neil King <http://www.visionaustralia.org/webaccess>
says:
> March 27, 2012 at 11:21 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-26>
>
> Hi All
>
> As some of you may be aware the Australian Government
and Vision
> Australia -- with the assistance of Adobe, conducted an
depth study
> into the accessibility of PDF back in 2010. The work
included a
> detailed analysis of the support by screen readers and
other devices
> for the PDF format; including those listed in the study
above.
>
> The report detailing the findings from the Australian
Government's
> study into the Accessibility of the Portable Document
Format for
> people with a disability is available at:
> http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/pdf-accessibility-study/index.html
>
> The findings of this report have been instrumental in
focusing R&D
> into this area. Assistive technology developers, Adobe,
the W3C,
> Australian Government, Vision Australia and others have
all made
> strides in providing greater support and advice to
remove the
> accessibility barriers in relation to the PDF format.
As a result of
> this work the Australian Government now considers the
PDF format to
> be an accessibly supported technology that can be used
as a
> standalone format if compliant with WCAG 2.0.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=26#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=26#respond>>
> 11.
> Sandesh says:
> March 30, 2012 at 8:55 am
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-28>
>
> Good work indeed!
> i just remembered the brief period of my testing of
such PDF
> documents. JAWS and Supernoa i gave my hands to, i
couldn't get the
> opportunity to do the testing with Win-eyes. all such
future
> studies-findings are awaited.
> thanks
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=28#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=28#respond>>
> 12.
> pvagner says:
> April 12, 2012 at 6:18 am
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-66>
>
> Hello,
> I don't want to hurt anyone but just to remind gently
that NVDA
> 2012.1 release was overlapping a little with Priti's
work.
> Some little things she has mentioned are improved in
the new stable
> version of NVDA.
> The report title script correctly reports the window
title while the
> acrobat reader X window has focus. Previously it would
only report
> acroread32.
> There are some significant changes related to
interpreting and
> reporting tables however I haven't tested that my-self
so am unable
> to say it really addresses some of the points mentioned
in the article.
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=66#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=66#respond>>
> *
> priti says:
> April 15, 2012 at 12:31 pm
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18#comment-80>
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks a lot for sharing your findings with new release
of NVDA.
> Its not about hurting anyone, infact readers will
benefit from
> this update, it is much appreciated!
>
> Regards,
> Priti
>
> Reply <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=80#respond
> <http://accessibilitychatter.com/?p=18&replytocom=80#respond>>
>
> [Les parties de ce message comportant autre chose que
du texte seul
> ont été supprimées]
>
>
[Les parties de ce message comportant autre chose que du
texte seul ont été supprimées]
__._,_.___
Répondre à expéditeur |
Répondre à groupe
| Répondre
en mode Web | Nouvelle discussion
Toute
la discussion ( 5)
Activités
récentes:
Aller sur votre groupe
Passer à : Texte seulement, Résumé
du jour • Désinscription • Conditions d’utilisation
.
__,_._,___
|
