Document accessibility
We make documents accessible to PDF/UA and WCAG 2.2
Send us your PDF, Word or InDesign file — you get back a document with a correct tag structure that passes the PAC check, together with a report you can hand to an auditor.
Scoping is free
Against which standards
A document has its own clause in the standard — it is not the same checklist as a website
PDF/UA — ISO 14289-1
The international technical standard for accessible PDF: tags, reading order, language, metadata, bookmarks, correct tables and forms.
WCAG 2.2 via WCAG2ICT
The W3C note explaining how WCAG criteria apply to non-web content. Contrast, alternatives, headings — the same requirements.
EN 301 549, clause 10
The European standard has a dedicated clause for non-web documents. It is what EU and Ukrainian requirements point to.
Ukraine: Resolution 757
For public bodies it covers not only websites and apps but electronic documents too, under DSTU EN 301 549:2022.
Clause 10 is not clause 9
EN 301 549 assesses a web page under clause 9, which references WCAG. A document falls under clause 10, which adds requirements the web simply does not have: tag reading order, artifact marking for decorative elements, document metadata, bookmarks for long files. So "the site is accessible" does not mean "the PDF on it is accessible".
Why a green tick from a checker is not the finish line
The Matterhorn Protocol breaks PDF/UA into 136 failure conditions. Here is how they split.
conditions need a human
Whether the reading order is right, whether the alt text is meaningful, whether an element really is decorative — a machine cannot tell. Two more conditions have no test at all.
checkpoints in the standard
The PDF Association broke ISO 14289-1 into 31 checkpoints — the full list of what is assessed at all.
conditions a machine can check
Tags, language, metadata, the presence of alt text — an automated checker finds all of this in seconds.
What "passes PAC" means
PAC is the free PDF Accessibility Checker by axes4, around since 2010 and funded by the German Federal Ministry of Labour. It checks both PDF/UA and WCAG. We bring a document to the point where PAC reports no errors — and do not stop there: a machine cannot see 47 of the Matterhorn conditions, so reading order and the substance of alternatives are walked by hand with a screen reader.
What exactly we fix
Not a one-click "convert to accessible PDF" — we rebuild the structure
Tag structure and reading order
A tag tree that follows the content, not the visual layout. The screen reader reads the document in the order it was written, not the order elements landed on the page.
Images and decoration
Meaningful alternative text for informative graphics. Decorative elements are marked as artifacts so they do not get in the way.
Tables
Row and column headers, merged cells, captions. Complex tables get explicit header associations so a cell is announced together with its header.
Links and navigation
Meaningful link text instead of "click here", bookmarks for long documents, correct internal destinations.
Language and metadata
Document language and language of foreign-language passages, the document title, and the setting that shows that title in the viewer window.
Contrast and typography
We check text and element contrast against WCAG. Where it fails we propose options that do not break your layout.
PDF forms
Field labels, hints, tab order, error messages. Filling the form has to be possible with a keyboard alone and with a screen reader.
Headings and lists
A real H1–H6 hierarchy instead of text that is merely set in a larger size. Lists, quotes and footnotes get the tags they should have.
Formats we work with
If the document was laid out in InDesign or Word we fix the source — then every future export stays accessible. If there is no source, we work on the PDF directly. Scanned documents go through text recognition first.
What you get
- The remediated document with a correct tag structure, passing the PAC check with no errors
- PAC reports before and after — you can see what was wrong and what changed
- The result of a manual reading-order pass with a screen reader — the part no checker covers
- A short guide for your team on how not to break accessibility during the next edit
Pricing
Quoted per document
The price depends on page count, layout complexity, tables and forms, and whether a source file exists. Send the document and we will scope it for free.
Send a documentFrequently asked questions
Is it enough to export a PDF from Word with the accessibility option ticked?
For a plain text document, sometimes. But as soon as there are tables, multi-column layout, images with text or forms, the export produces tags that do not match the content. Reading order usually stays visual rather than logical — and that is what hurts a screen reader most.
Do you fix the PDF or the source file?
If a source exists — InDesign, Word, PowerPoint — we fix that. It pays off: every future export stays accessible and you do not have to order remediation again. If the source is gone, we work on the PDF directly.
What is PAC and why does it matter?
PAC is the PDF Accessibility Checker, a free tool by axes4 that tests conformance with PDF/UA and WCAG. It has been around since 2010 and is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Labour, so its report is accepted as evidence. We hand over the document with PAC reporting no errors, plus the before and after reports.
Does "no PAC errors" mean the document is fully accessible?
No, and we say so plainly. The Matterhorn Protocol breaks PDF/UA into 136 failure conditions: a machine checks 87 of them, while 47 require human judgement — is the reading order right, is the alt text meaningful, is that element truly decorative. Two more have no automated test at all. That is why we walk the document by hand with a screen reader after the checker.
Do you handle scans?
Yes. A scan is an image of a page with no real text in it, so we run recognition first, proofread the result, and then build the tag structure as for any other document. It takes longer and costs more than working from a digital original, so if a source file survives anywhere, send that instead.
Send a document for scoping
We will look at what is wrong with it and come back with the scope, the timeline and the cost.
Send a documentScoping → proposal