On 4/29/25 19:13, Matthias Weber wrote:
Dear All,
I am starting a new thread as requested.
Hi Matthias,
I can confirm that [...] produces a PDF that passes the accessibility check in the current> Adobe Acrobat. In particular, it passes the alternate text checks. Hovering over the image shows the alternate text in Acrobat.
I think that alternate texts are primarily intended to be read aloud. In fact, the older PDF specification (the only one publicly avaiblable) describes them as (third row from https://opensource.adobe.com/dc-acrobat-sdk-docs/pdfstandards/PDF32000_2008....): An alternate description of the structure element and its children in human-readable form, which is useful when extracting the document’s contents in support of accessibility to users with disabilities or for other purposes. Displaying the alternate text when hovering the image is not in support of accessibility (I think), but just for other purposes.
However, VoiceOver (on the Mac) does not read the alternate text; it completely ignores the existence of the image.
In Preview, no alternate text is shown or read. So it seems that the> only benefit is that readers with vision can see an alternate text...
Sorry, could it be possible that both programs might not comply with accessibility as PDF requires it? Or do both programs read aloud the alternative text for the »Bundesadler« from https://www.recht.bund.de/bgbl/1/2025/104/regelungstext.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3? Your final comment on the only benefit is not clear to me. Visually-impaired living beings (not especially humans) may find easier listening to sound or voices than seeing in general.
I don’t have access to a Windows machine, so I cannot test what other screen readers can do with this document.
I think the Accessibility Directive requires reading programs to comply by making them accessible (sorry, bad wording, but I guess it is clear what I mean [let me know if it is not]). I hope it helps, Pablo