4 ms·

If PDF format is the preferred format of those needing to access the work, compared to likely alternatives, then it is accessible. Are you claiming you know bet

by simonh 4y ago

If PDF format is the preferred format of those needing to access the work, compared to likely alternatives, then it is accessible. Are you claiming you know better what the needs of professionals in the field are?

gjs278 4y ago
Loughla 4y ago
I think maybe we have a difference in what accessible means. I'm talking accessible as in, 'I can literally access this', not as in 'I can understand what this means'. I use a screen reader, and unless the pdf is explicitly created as an accessible pdf, it is just garbled up nonsense.
- simonh 4y ago
  Oh ok, fair enough. Are there standards for accessibility for sophisticated mathematical notations? I suppose there must be by now.
- raattgift 4y ago
  Almost all arXiv submitters (and certainly any serious one in a category like this paper's math.AP (Mathematics / Analysis of Partial Differential Equations) <https://arxiv.org/list/math.AP/new https://arxiv.org/list/math.AP/new>; click the "other" in "[pdf, ps, other]" and there click Download sources) will supply the preprint's sources, which in mathematics-heavy fields are almost always LaTeX. The sources are associated in a predictable way with the abstract page, which is what should practically always be supplied instead of a direct link to a PDF or other final format. In this particular case <https://arxiv.org/format/2205.14808 https://arxiv.org/format/2205.14808> lets you "Download source", where the source in question is a tar file with four png images and a large .tex file. The .tex file has long swathes of English text; equations are mostly in $math$, although there are some parts that are likely to be less straightforward to access (e.g. under "Definition of the Ricci and curvature coefficients"). arXiv admins and most authors will react supportively to contact from blind and visually impaired people who want to read a preprint. Some categories and broader disciplines have more work to do than others. For example <https://astrobites.org/2022/07/17/making-astronomy-accessible-for-blind-and-visually-impaired-astronomers/ https://astrobites.org/2022/07/17/making-astronomy-accessibl...> I think should link to the abstract page <https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.13815v1 https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.13815v1> so that one can find the .tex file (and a .docx), but instead directly links to the PDF.

by simonh 4y ago

gjs278 4y ago

Loughla 4y ago

I think maybe we have a difference in what accessible means. I'm talking accessible as in, 'I can literally access this', not as in 'I can understand what this means'. I use a screen reader, and unless the pdf is explicitly created as an accessible pdf, it is just garbled up nonsense.

simonh 4y ago
Oh ok, fair enough. Are there standards for accessibility for sophisticated mathematical notations? I suppose there must be by now.
raattgift 4y ago
Almost all arXiv submitters (and certainly any serious one in a category like this paper's math.AP (Mathematics / Analysis of Partial Differential Equations) <https://arxiv.org/list/math.AP/new https://arxiv.org/list/math.AP/new>; click the "other" in "[pdf, ps, other]" and there click Download sources) will supply the preprint's sources, which in mathematics-heavy fields are almost always LaTeX. The sources are associated in a predictable way with the abstract page, which is what should practically always be supplied instead of a direct link to a PDF or other final format. In this particular case <https://arxiv.org/format/2205.14808 https://arxiv.org/format/2205.14808> lets you "Download source", where the source in question is a tar file with four png images and a large .tex file. The .tex file has long swathes of English text; equations are mostly in $math$, although there are some parts that are likely to be less straightforward to access (e.g. under "Definition of the Ricci and curvature coefficients"). arXiv admins and most authors will react supportively to contact from blind and visually impaired people who want to read a preprint. Some categories and broader disciplines have more work to do than others. For example <https://astrobites.org/2022/07/17/making-astronomy-accessible-for-blind-and-visually-impaired-astronomers/ https://astrobites.org/2022/07/17/making-astronomy-accessibl...> I think should link to the abstract page <https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.13815v1 https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.13815v1> so that one can find the .tex file (and a .docx), but instead directly links to the PDF.