Hello All,
Give this application a go! http://www.convertpdftohtml.net/
I haven't used it myself so I cannot vouch for effectiveness
Cheers
Michele Smorgon
t: +613 9017 6616 | m: +61 415 909 019 | About me
e: mich...@maxoz.com.au | w: http://www.socialmedia-max.com | b: http://www.maxoz.com.au | a: pob 6606 st kilda rd central | melbourne VIC | australia | 8008
This email contains privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please delete immediately without printing copying or disseminating. Your advice to the author of the error will be greatly appreciated.
please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
This email contains privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please delete immediately without printing copying or disseminating. Your advice to the author of the error will be greatly appreciated.
please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: WSG Digest
From: <wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
Date: Fri, February 11, 2011 1:43 pm
To: <wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
*********************************************************************
WEB STANDARDS GROUP MAIL LIST DIGEST
*********************************************************************
From: "David Linden" <davi...@vla.vic.gov.au>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 13:54:05 +1100
Subject: Re: WSG Digest
Hi all
I'm very interested too. Again, thanks Neeraj.
>>> <wsg@webstandardsgroup.org> 10/02/2011 1:39 PM >>>
*********************************************************************
WEB STANDARDS GROUP MAIL LIST DIGEST
*********************************************************************
From: "Knaus, Bridget" <kn...@aciar.gov.au>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 13:30:10 +1100
Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
I would be very interested in other people's experiences as well.
Thanks
for asking the question Neeraj.
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of Neeraj Challana
Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 1:19 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Hi all,
We need a tool to help us convert our many existing PDF documents into
Word and/or HTML to improve the accessibility of our web and intranet
content. While there are tools (both freeware and licence ware)
available, I would like to get some recommendations and experience of
other organisations in selecting and using of such conversion tools.
Your help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Neeraj
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************
*********************************************************************
From: "Peter Larsen" <p...@rts.dk>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 03:34:51 +0100
Subject: Autosvar - Ikke til stede: WSG Digest
Jeg er ikke på skolen i øjeblikket. Men vender tilbage så
hurtigt
jeg kan
I am not at the college at the moment - but I will get back to you as
soon as possible
Med venlig hilsen/best wishes
Peter Larsen
Center for Medie og Kommunikation
Roskilde Tekniske Skole
*********************************************************************
From: "Edo Kamal" <edo.ka...@macquarie.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 13:37:54 +1100
Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: WSG Digest
I am currently out of office. I will be back in the office on Thursday,
10
February 2011.
For enquiries please contact:
Papinder Hamid (x77756)
p: +61 2 8237 7756
e: papinder.ha...@macquarie.com
Notice: The information contained in this email is confidential. If you
are
not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information
in
this email in any way. If you received it in error, please tell us
immedia
tely by return email and delete the document. Macquarie does not
guarantee
the integrity of any emails or attached files and is not responsible
for an
y changes made to them by any other person. Macquarie does not warrant
or g
uarantee that information contained in any email or attached file is
free o
f viruses, worms, trojan horses or anything else having contaminating
or de
structive properties and has not been intercepted and interfered with
durin
g transmission. It is your sole responsibility to protect yourself
against
such risk and, by opening any email or attached file you agree to
assume a
ll risks associated with electronic data transmission. Electronic
communica
tions carried within the Macquarie system may be monitored. Macquarie
Funds
Group services are provided by Macquarie Bank Limited ABN 46 008 583
542 o
r one of its related entities.
*********************************************************************
From: "Eduardo Vackflores E." <ev...@oaks.cl>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 18:38:57 -0800
Subject: En Vacaciones Re: WSG Digest
Hola, estoy de vacaciones hasta el 21 de febrero!
Cualquier cosa comunicarse con
Abigail Norambuena abig...@mente.cl o al fono 7146470
muchas gracIas
Atte
Eduardo V
MENTE ENAXXION
*********************************************************************
From: Russ Weakley <r...@maxdesign.com.au>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 14:00:59 +1100
Subject: Re: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Hi Neeraj,
Some questions:
1. are you also aiming to make the PDF's accessible? (i.e. tagged
PDFs)
2. why PDF to Word?
I have found there is little benefit in this type of conversion. I just
checked with a blind user now - asking "is there any advantage in Word
over PDF"?
His answer: "If the PDF is well structured, converting it to Word could
remove some of the assistive structure. If the PF is not well
structured, there is no advantage either way"
One place to try as a conversion service/tool is River Docs
http://riverdocs.com/
Good luck!
Russ
On 09/02/2011, at 1:18 PM, Neeraj Challana wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We need a tool to help us convert our many existing PDF documents
into
Word and/or HTML to improve the accessibility of our web and intranet
content. While there are tools (both freeware and licence ware)
available, I would like to get some recommendations and experience of
other organisations in selecting and using of such conversion tools.
>
>
> Your help is greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Neeraj
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> *******************************************************************
*********************************************************************
From: Dave Lane <d...@egressive.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:28:31 +1300
Subject: Re: [WSG] PDF Conversion
On 09/02/11 16:00, Russ Weakley wrote:
> Some questions:
>
> 1. are you also aiming to make the PDF's accessible? (i.e. tagged
> PDFs)
>
> 2. why PDF to Word? I have found there is little benefit in this
type
> of conversion. I just checked with a blind user now - asking "is
> there any advantage in Word over PDF"?
>
> His answer: "If the PDF is well structured, converting it to Word
> could remove some of the assistive structure. If the PF is not well
> structured, there is no advantage either way"
Thanks for asking those questions, Russ, and checking with users of
assistive technologies. I also wondered how moving from an open
standard
to a proprietary one would help anyone with anything...
Sadly, most people creating documents know far less about structured
data, consistent formatting, and open standards than people on this
list...
Dave
--
Dave Lane, Egressive Ltd d...@egressive.com m +64212298147 p
+6439633733
http://egressive.com Free/OpenSourceSoftware: because to share is
human
Only use Open Standards - w3.org, Drupal powers communities -
drupal.org
Effusion Group http://effusiongroup.com Software Patents kill
innovation
*********************************************************************
From: "Webb, KerryA" <kerrya.w...@act.gov.au>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 03:41:51 +0000
Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Dave Lane:
>
> Thanks for asking those questions, Russ, and checking with users of
> assistive technologies. I also wondered how moving from an open
standard
> to a proprietary one would help anyone with anything...
>
Perhaps because not everyone would agree with Russ' blind user, and
they mi
ght have a setup that can handle Word better than PDF.
For those who might not be aware of it, current Australian government
requi
rements mandate that PDFs should not be published on their own, but
should
be accompanied by an accessible equivalent.
Kerry
--
Kerry Webb
Manager
Policy Office | InTACT
Shared Services | ACT Government
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also
privileged. I
f you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and
delete a
ll copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately.
You
should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to
any
other person.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
*********************************************************************
From: Russ Weakley <r...@maxdesign.com.au>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 14:55:25 +1100
Subject: Re: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Hi Kerry. Neither the blind user or I were suggesting that alternatives
were
not a good idea, or even a requirement. I'd always recommend providing
an H
TML alternative if possible along with accessible (tagged) PDF. The
question
was about Word as as a viable alternative to PDF. I am not sure it is.
Thou
gh others may disagree!
Thanks
Russ
-----------------------------
Russ Weakley
Max Design
Phone: (02) 9410 2521
Mobile: 0403 433 980
Email: r...@maxdesign.com.au
Skype: russ-maxdesign
MSN: r...@maxdesign.com.au
Website: http://www.maxdesign.com.au/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/russmaxdesign
Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/russweakley
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/maxdesign/
--------------------------
On 09/02/2011, at 2:41 PM, "Webb, KerryA" <kerrya.w...@act.gov.au>
wrote:
>
> Dave Lane:
>>
>> Thanks for asking those questions, Russ, and checking with users of
>> assistive technologies. I also wondered how moving from an open
standard
>> to a proprietary one would help anyone with anything...
>>
>
> Perhaps because not everyone would agree with Russ' blind user, and
they m
ight have a setup that can handle Word better than PDF.
>
> For those who might not be aware of it, current Australian government
requ
irements mandate that PDFs should not be published on their own, but
should b
e accompanied by an accessible equivalent.
>
> Kerry
> --
> Kerry Webb
> Manager
> Policy Office | InTACT
> Shared Services | ACT Government
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also
privileged. I
f you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and
delete al
l copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately.
You sh
ould not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to
any ot
her person.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> *******************************************************************
>
*********************************************************************
From: Dave Lane <d...@egressive.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 17:09:16 +1300
Subject: Re: [WSG] PDF Conversion
On 09/02/11 16:55, Russ Weakley wrote:
> Hi Kerry. Neither the blind user or I were suggesting that
> alternatives were not a good idea, or even a requirement. I'd always
> recommend providing an HTML alternative if possible along with
> accessible (tagged) PDF. The question was about Word as as a viable
> alternative to PDF. I am not sure it is. Though others may disagree!
I'm not an accessibility expert, but it seems pretty obvious that if
the
PDF isn't well structured (which would presumably make it more
accessible), I can't imagine that converting it to an MS Word document
will add any sensible structure that wasn't there before.
Using standards compliant HTML as an alternative accessible standard
makes much more sense (again, assuming the source document wasn't
generated from your typical poorly structured MS Word document).
Regards,
Dave
--
Dave Lane, Egressive Ltd d...@egressive.com m +64212298147 p
+6439633733
http://egressive.com Free/OpenSourceSoftware: because to share is
human
Only use Open Standards - w3.org, Drupal powers communities -
drupal.org
Effusion Group http://effusiongroup.com Software Patents kill
innovation
*********************************************************************
From: "Webb, KerryA" <kerrya.w...@act.gov.au>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 04:32:50 +0000
Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Dave wrote:
>
> On 09/02/11 16:55, Russ Weakley wrote:
> > Hi Kerry. Neither the blind user or I were suggesting that
> > alternatives were not a good idea, or even a requirement. I'd
always
> > recommend providing an HTML alternative if possible along with
> > accessible (tagged) PDF. The question was about Word as as a
viable
> > alternative to PDF. I am not sure it is. Though others may
disagree!
>
> I'm not an accessibility expert, but it seems pretty obvious that if
the
> PDF isn't well structured (which would presumably make it more
> accessible), I can't imagine that converting it to an MS Word
document
> will add any sensible structure that wasn't there before.
>
Neither am I an accessibility expert, but I'm of necessity taking more
inte
rest in it these days.
There are a number of reasons - not just about structure - why a blind
user
might have trouble with a PDF. An MS Word (or an RTF) document may be
a m
ore accessible alternative to a PDF.
> Using standards compliant HTML as an alternative accessible standard
> makes much more sense (again, assuming the source document wasn't
> generated from your typical poorly structured MS Word document).
>
And few Web managers will find the time and resources to create a
readable
standards compliant HTML version of a multi-multi-page PDF, whereas a
Word
document will in many cases be more doable.
Kerry
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also
privileged. I
f you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and
delete a
ll copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately.
You
should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to
any
other person.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
*********************************************************************
From: "Geary, Damien" <damien.ge...@act.gov.au>;
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 04:48:29 +0000
Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Just to touch on the OP's question, Adobe Acrobat Pro has the ability
to ba
tch export many pdfs to HTML. Select File > Export > Multiple Files.
Select
the files you want batch converted, choose html as your output. Proceed
to
laugh \ cry at the lack of formatting \ structure retained in the html
ver
sion.
-----Original Message-----
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On B
ehalf Of Webb, KerryA
Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 3:33 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Dave wrote:
>
> On 09/02/11 16:55, Russ Weakley wrote:
> > Hi Kerry. Neither the blind user or I were suggesting that
> > alternatives were not a good idea, or even a requirement. I'd
always
> > recommend providing an HTML alternative if possible along with
> > accessible (tagged) PDF. The question was about Word as as a
viable
> > alternative to PDF. I am not sure it is. Though others may
disagree!
>
> I'm not an accessibility expert, but it seems pretty obvious that if
the
> PDF isn't well structured (which would presumably make it more
> accessible), I can't imagine that converting it to an MS Word
document
> will add any sensible structure that wasn't there before.
>
Neither am I an accessibility expert, but I'm of necessity taking more
inte
rest in it these days.
There are a number of reasons - not just about structure - why a blind
user
might have trouble with a PDF. An MS Word (or an RTF) document may be
a m
ore accessible alternative to a PDF.
> Using standards compliant HTML as an alternative accessible standard
> makes much more sense (again, assuming the source document wasn't
> generated from your typical poorly structured MS Word document).
>
And few Web managers will find the time and resources to create a
readable
standards compliant HTML version of a multi-multi-page PDF, whereas a
Word
document will in many cases be more doable.
Kerry
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also
privileged. I
f you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and
delete a
ll copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately.
You
should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to
any
other person.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************
*********************************************************************
From: Samuel Santana <samuel.sant...@veohrc.vic.gov.au>;
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 16:33:31 +1100
Subject: Re: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Hi all,
This is not a solution to your problem as these documents have already
been
created but just wanted to add my two-cents.
Generally publications are created/developed using a word processing
file
(MS-Word or equivalent). Word processors have the ability to work with
their
own internal stylesheets which aside from providing visual consitency
in
relation to headings etc. it can also be used to provide a structure to
the
document. This can be used to automatically generate table of contents
etc.
but more importantly in the context of this question it also provides
a
heading hierarchy (just like that required by accessible HTML).
Preparing a corporate document(s) template for staff to use in the
preparation of documents can take some negotiating and a slight shift
in how
people work with programs like Word (not just selecting a piece of text
and
making it 20-point Arial but instead formatting is as a heading 2 for
example) but it provides many advantages including two very important
ones
such as the ability to export that document as a web page (with a CSS
section rather than inline markup) but also allowing the document
(along
with other requirements such as providing alternative text to images
etc.)
to be fully accessible to screen readers.
Sam
On 9 February 2011 15:48, Geary, Damien <damien.ge...@act.gov.au>;
wrote:
> Just to touch on the OP's question, Adobe Acrobat Pro has the ability
to
> batch export many pdfs to HTML. Select File > Export > Multiple
Files.
> Select the files you want batch converted, choose html as your
output.
> Proceed to laugh \ cry at the lack of formatting \ structure retained
in the
> html version.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org
[mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
> Behalf Of Webb, KerryA
> Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 3:33 PM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
>
> Dave wrote:
> >
> > On 09/02/11 16:55, Russ Weakley wrote:
> > > Hi Kerry. Neither the blind user or I were suggesting that
> > > alternatives were not a good idea, or even a requirement. I'd
always
> > > recommend providing an HTML alternative if possible along with
> > > accessible (tagged) PDF. The question was about Word as as a
viable
> > > alternative to PDF. I am not sure it is. Though others may
disagree!
> >
> > I'm not an accessibility expert, but it seems pretty obvious that
if the
> > PDF isn't well structured (which would presumably make it more
> > accessible), I can't imagine that converting it to an MS Word
document
> > will add any sensible structure that wasn't there before.
> >
>
> Neither am I an accessibility expert, but I'm of necessity taking
more
> interest in it these days.
>
> There are a number of reasons - not just about structure - why a
blind user
> might have trouble with a PDF. An MS Word (or an RTF) document may
be a
> more accessible alternative to a PDF.
>
> > Using standards compliant HTML as an alternative accessible
standard
> > makes much more sense (again, assuming the source document wasn't
> > generated from your typical poorly structured MS Word document).
> >
>
> And few Web managers will find the time and resources to create a
readable
> standards compliant HTML version of a multi-multi-page PDF, whereas a
Word
> document will in many cases be more doable.
>
> Kerry
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also
privileged.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and
delete
> all copies of this transmission along with any attachments
immediately. You
> should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents
to any
> other person.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> *******************************************************************
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> *******************************************************************
>
>
>
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security
System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>
>
*********************************************************************
From: Grant Bailey <grant malcolm bai...@westnet.com.au>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:54:33 +1100
Subject: Re: [WSG] PDF Conversion
Hello,
I understand that Nuance make a PDF converter:
http://shop.nuance.com/store?Action="">
AU&SiteID=scsoftAP&id=ProductDetailsPage&productID=208595700
Have not used it myself however, it may be an improvement on the
Acrobat
batch convert that Damien talks about. Perhaps others could offer
comments.
Regards,
Grant Bailey
On 9/02/2011 4:33 PM, Samuel Santana wrote:
> Hi all,
> This is not a solution to your problem as these documents have
already
> been created but just wanted to add my two-cents.
> Generally publications are created/developed using a word processing
> file (MS-Word or equivalent). Word processors have the ability to
work
> with their own internal stylesheets which aside from providing visual
> consitency in relation to headings etc. it can also be used to
provide
> a structure to the document. This can be used to automatically
> generate table of contents etc. but more importantly in the context
of
> this question it also provides a heading hierarchy (just like that
> required by accessible HTML).
> Preparing a corporate document(s) template for staff to use in the
> preparation of documents can take some negotiating and a slight shift
> in how people work with programs like Word (not just selecting a
piece
> of text and making it 20-point Arial but instead formatting is as a
> heading 2 for example) but it provides many advantages including two
> very important ones such as the ability to export that document as a
> web page (with a CSS section rather than inline markup) but also
> allowing the document (along with other requirements such as
providing
> alternative text to images etc.) to be fully accessible to screen
readers.
> Sam
>
> On 9 February 2011 15:48, Geary, Damien <damien.ge...@act.gov.au
> <mailto:damien.ge...@act.gov.au>>; wrote:
>
> Just to touch on the OP's question, Adobe Acrobat Pro has the
> ability to batch export many pdfs to HTML. Select File > Export
>
> Multiple Files. Select the files you want batch converted,
choose
> html as your output. Proceed to laugh \ cry at the lack of
> formatting \ structure retained in the html version.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org
> <mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org>
> [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org
> <mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org>] On Behalf Of Webb, KerryA
> Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 3:33 PM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org <mailto:wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
> Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
>
> Dave wrote:
> >
> > On 09/02/11 16:55, Russ Weakley wrote:
> > > Hi Kerry. Neither the blind user or I were suggesting that
> > > alternatives were not a good idea, or even a requirement.
I'd
> always
> > > recommend providing an HTML alternative if possible along
with
> > > accessible (tagged) PDF. The question was about Word as as a
> viable
> > > alternative to PDF. I am not sure it is. Though others may
> disagree!
> >
> > I'm not an accessibility expert, but it seems pretty obvious
> that if the
> > PDF isn't well structured (which would presumably make it more
> > accessible), I can't imagine that converting it to an MS Word
> document
> > will add any sensible structure that wasn't there before.
> >
>
> Neither am I an accessibility expert, but I'm of necessity
taking
> more interest in it these days.
>
> There are a number of reasons - not just about structure - why a
> blind user might have trouble with a PDF. An MS Word (or an
RTF)
> document may be a more accessible alternative to a PDF.
>
> > Using standards compliant HTML as an alternative accessible
standard
> > makes much more sense (again, assuming the source document
wasn't
> > generated from your typical poorly structured MS Word
document).
> >
>
> And few Web managers will find the time and resources to create
a
> readable standards compliant HTML version of a multi-multi-page
> PDF, whereas a Word document will in many cases be more doable.
>
> Kerry
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also
> privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify
> the sender and delete all copies of this transmission along with
> any attachments immediately. You should not copy or use it for
any
> purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
*******************************************************************
> List Guidelines:
http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> <mailto:memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org>
>
*******************************************************************
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************
> List Guidelines:
http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> <mailto:memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org>
>
*******************************************************************
>
>
>
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security
System.
> For more information please visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> *******************************************************************
*********************************************************************
From: "Michael MD" <md...@spraci.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 18:17:04 +1100
Subject: RE: [WSG] PDF Conversion
linux pdftohtml
(you can apt-get it)
Its not perfect (formatting often comes out a bit strange and the html
is
messy) but at least you end up with something you can edit.
Unfortunately I haven't seen anything better yet,
and absolutely nothing anywhere near good enough to use without needing
to
manually edit or clean up the output.
My recommendation: If its for public release and needs to be accessible
or
converted to other formats, don't use pdf to start with!
*********************************************************************
From: Dave Lane <d...@egressive.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 20:25:39 +1300
Subject: Re: [WSG] PDF Conversion
On 09/02/11 20:17, Michael MD wrote:
> My recommendation: If its for public release and needs to be
accessible or
> converted to other formats, don't use pdf to start with!
I think it's fair to say that if the source document is poorly
structured or lacks structure, you're out of luck no matter what you
do.
People need to be trained to understand the importance of structural
conventions and consistency... and now we've come full circle back to
open standard formats :)
Dave
--
Dave Lane, Egressive Ltd d...@egressive.com m +64212298147 p
+6439633733
http://egressive.com Free/OpenSourceSoftware: because to share is
human
Only use Open Standards - w3.org, Drupal powers communities -
drupal.org
Effusion Group http://effusiongroup.com Software Patents kill
innovation
**************************************************************
Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
**************************************************************
=========================
=========================
=========================
=========
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, and may contain
legally privileged
information.
They are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
it is
addressed and must not be copied, forwarded or disclosed to anyone
without the
sender's consent.
If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination,
forwarding, printing,
or copying of this e-mail and any attachments is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please advise via reply
e-mail to the
sender. Please destroy the original transmission and its contents.
=========================
=========================
=========================
=========
**************************************************************
Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
**************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************
