Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2022 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On 17/05/2022 18.03, Olivier Hallot wrote:
I have updated the tender document with the valuable inputs received.

My gratitude to C. Strobbe, S. Mohn and T. Vajngerl for their comments.

The tender document file is now

for more comments and advise.

Sorry for being a bit late.

I like the proposal.
The introduction is very informative and provides the necessary background knowledge.
It also gives a differentiation between 2 parts:

1) "First is to enable PDF/UA support into PDF export, which writes a PDF/UA flag into the PDF document and enables all the required features."

2) "an accessibility check functionality, which traverses the document structure and gathers all possible accessibility issues"

However, I'm a bit confused about the exact scope:
Not being a native English speaker, I would have understood the later section "Scope out of this Tender" as "Out of scope for this tender", i.e. "not to be done as part of this tender".
Is that correct?

If so, my understanding would have been that the tender mostly covers aspect 2) from above, but not actual PDF export, since the "Scope out of this Tender" section contains this: "Development and bug fixes to the PDF export module (pdfium or equivalent), related to the PDF/UA-1 standard."

But then, it seems to me that issue tdf#148934 listed in the "LibreOffice Upstream fixes" section would presumably require improving PDF export as well. The same might be true for the requirement that exported documents should pass veraPDF validation (mentioned in section "Acceptance criteria"), unless the set of features used in the sample documents (the ones listed in section "PDF/UA checks"?) is guaranteed to already be covered by the current PDF export implementation just fine.

Can that possibly be clarified? (Maybe I just misunderstand something.)

Depending on the exact scope of this tender, we could also consider making PDF export issues part of the "Fix accessibility issues" tender scheduled for this year:

Which brings me to Heiko's earlier message in this thread:

On 11/05/2022 09.36, Heiko Tietze wrote:
I wonder why the other tickets from META bug 139007 are excluded (btw, there is
kind of duplicate META bug 101912 with a lot more).
Three weeks seems underestimated if we expect to solve all issues.

The general a11y meta bug 101912 depends on the PDF a11y meta one, bug 139007. Therefore, dependencies of bug 139007 are listed in the tree view for bug 101912 as well:

Given that, I think it makes sense to add PDF a11y bugs as explicit dependencies for bug 139007 only. (They'll be shown as transitive dependencies for bug 101912 anyway then.)

Best regards,

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.