PDF documents should be held so you can WCAG dos.0 criteria, but WCAG 2.0, clearly, is not adequate, just like the I have revealed. At some level, Adobe seems to be conscious that WCAG 2.0 doesn’t completely safety PDF, as they continue (emphasis extra):
“…and you will feel that the usage WCAG dos.0 with increased guidance included in WCAG2ICT brings appropriate requirements so you can ensure that PDF data files was obtainable if you have disabilities.”
“The fresh Board can offer PDF/UA given that a selection for writers, however, must want more conditions out-of WCAG dos.0 to help you guarantee that all content brands within this PDF data files try well enough protected. Experts who use PDF/UA discover they an incredibly useful supply of recommendations to possess PDF data files you to definitely conform to ISO 32000-step 1 style of PDF, however, WCAG 2.0 must be the primary need for conformance purposes.”
PDF/UA isn’t meant at all, profile otherwise setting to have “authors”. It’s a scientific specification meant for software developers. It’s really no appropriate a way to obtain pointers to own people than are OOXML, the fresh specs for the .DOCX files employed by Microsoft’s Term.
Application developers generate PDF/UA in their activities for the purpose of and make or processing PDF data. People will be merely come across PDF/UA after they see it among the enjoys offered by its app. File experts gets the benefits of PDF/UA from the same elements wherein it interact with app to make certain WCAG 2.0 conformance.
How to not ever fool around with WCAG2ICT