the problem with acrobat 5.0 is that it only works with the latest and
greatest even if you do go to all the trouble of making the conversions
that you outline below with the expensive paper capture software.  I
don't have a ready solution to hand except that you may wish to consider
making available accessible versions of scanned/ocred and editted texts
which should be considerably cheaper than the method you outline and be
available to a wider audience.  you could make them available in html or
formatted text.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Trevor Wilks" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 11:12 PM
Subject: Accessible E-Reserve


Hi there,

We are currently trying to deal with the accessibility of our
University's
E-Reserve project (The digitisation of short loan material). Currently
library staff are using Adobe Acrobat to create PDF versions of reading
materials which are then put on the web for students to view and print.
I'm
sure most of you are already aware of this type of project which is why
I
am emailing this list.

I have been working my way through the range of documents which ADOBE
has
produced regarding its valiant attempts to improve the lives of people
with
a disability and have become increasingly confused as to what they have
actually done. After thinking that Acrobat 5.0 would do the trick we
have
just realised that to create an accessible paper to PDF file we will
probably need to use ADOBE Paper Capture 3.0 with its built in OCR.
Consequently we have also just looked at the price and realised that
this
software costs considerably more than your standard Acrobat 5.0.

I must admit at this point to being a bit of a conspiracy theorist and
as
such I have drawn some conclusions as to the motives of ADOBE in the
context of the new US law relating to the accessibility of Government
on-line information and the ADOBE announcements about how they will help
Government and business solve their accessibility problems.

Anyway enough said about that. I would be extremely grateful to anyone
who
is currently grappling with this issue in a University library context
who
could advise us on whether we are on the right track or barking up the
wrong tree totally.

Thanks very much for taking the time and effort to read this email.

Trevor