Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 26 May 2001 23:14:05 +1000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi all,
I'm trying to understand the reasoning behind Adobe's new document
security system, which is going to cause us so much hassel.
By this, I mean giving authors the ability to prevent others extracting
information from their documents, particularly the text content that we
need.
If they are trying to protect the layout/artistic qualities of the
document, scanners and photocopiers are not going to be troubled by the
PDF files security settings.
If they are trying to protect the text content, that is stop people
misusing part or all of the original text, then how does preventing us
from extracting a .TXT version acheeve that.
Anyone that wanted to "mess" with the original text would simply retype
it from the printed document. Then whatever would be done with the copy
or modified version would go ahead without regard for the security
settings in the .PDF file.
In the light of the 508 provisions, How can Adobe justify withdrawing
the ability to extract a .TXT version of a document, when anyone except
a blind person can readily produce one by retyping it from the printout.
I think that while Adobe should continue to negotiate with the various
screen reader manufacturers for a solution, they should also look
seriously at their reasoning behind preventing .TXT versions being
extracted from their .PDF files.
Awaiting justification from Adobe,
Paul from Australia.
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
|
|
|