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
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.)
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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