Are you swapping PDF for Word on your website?

In the last few months several clients have told me they’re removing PDF documents from their websites. Usually, I’d applaud this. Way too much content is locked up in poorly designed PDFs. But they’re swapping PDF for Word because someone told them Word was more accessible.

Word is more accessible than PDF? Really? Where is the evidence that supports this? Where is this advice coming from?

Before you go and swap your PDF content for Word documents, make sure you understand the implications.

Word is not an accessibility supported technology

Australian websites must meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. And they must use accessibility supported technologies to do this.

An ‘accessibility supported’ technology works with assistive technologies (like screen readers), and the accessibility features of operating systems, browsers and plug-ins. The guidelines say:

“This means that the way that the technology is used has been tested for interoperability with users’ assistive technology”.

Testing for interoperability is more than just “I downloaded a screen reader and it worked for me” or “My friend uses JAWS and Word works for her”. It involves testing different types of assistive technology, on different operating systems, across different devices.

Word hasn’t been tested in this way. So even if you’ve made your document as accessible as possible, and it passes Word’s accessibility checker, you can’t claim conformance to WCAG 2.0 if this is the only format you publish some of your content in.

PDF has some accessibility support

While Word hasn’t been tested for accessibility support, PDF has. Vision Australia ran two evaluation projects for the Australian Government. The first was an extensive study in 2010. While it found some problems with the technology, the main problem was poor document design. And users weren’t comfortable interacting with PDF files.

A second study in 2013 found the technology had improved for desktop users. But there were still problems with PDF on mobile devices.

In mid-2017 Adobe announced increased support for PDF on Android and iOS. But it acknowledged two problems: structural information in lists and tables isn’t read properly by screen readers. And it said “We are working on support for structural elements in upcoming releases”.

So it would be smarter to stick with PDF documents, than switch to MS Word.

Advice from the Digital Transformation Agency

Advice on content accessibility for Australian Government organisations is provided by the Digital Transformation Agency. As of May 2018, it recommends:

Only publish a PDF if there is a strong user need… If you make a PDF try to also publish in HTML. Publish the non-HTML format as a secondary source of the information… If you don’t publish an HTML version, be sure to publish an HTML summary on a landing page — and provide contact details for users who are unable to access the PDF. In all cases, you should follow guidance to make accessible PDFs.

Microsoft Word formats (.doc and .docx) don’t conform to WCAG 2.0. Additionally they can be difficult to view on mobile devices. Don’t publish Word documents on the web on their own. Provide the information on an HTML page as well. If this isn’t possible, create an accessible PDF and publish both non-HTML formats from a landing page that summarises the document. Make Word documents accessible to everyone even if you are emailing them internally.

Improving document accessibility

While documents are not considered as accessible as HTML, you can improve them with good document design. See:

And for some tips on cutting back on publishing documents online, see my article Reducing reliance on PDF documents online.

References

Note: Updated May 2018 to reflect current advice.

Written by Dey Alexander on