Re: Accessibility questions that are less technical

Am Wed, 28 Jan 2026 06:48:01 -0500 schrieb Jim Hefferon:

> Folks told me that the answer is that the reader I was using, Okular
> on Linux, is not sufficient.  But I got some questions so just to make
> the example concrete, I uploaded a file to my website
> https://hefferon.net/review_integration.pdf that shows the behavior.
> FWIW, it uses ltx-talk.cls and the source is
> https://gitlab.com/jim.hefferon/calc-ii-talks/-/blob/master/review_integration/review_integration.tex?ref_type=heads.

As David wrote, the pdf is broken. Either you didn't make enough
compilation runs (pdflatex needs a few more than lualatex to get the
tagging structure right) or something is broken (tagging with
pdflatex is more fragile then with lualatex). 

I can not test myself which one it is as graphics are missing and I
do have the time to figure out how you are creating them. 

But as David said: Use lualatex. If you want "to do the
highest PDF standard" as you put it, then lualatex is a *must*. You
will not get really good math accessibility, good real space chars,
good handling of hyphenation, good unicode support and more without
lualatex. 

-- 
Ulrike Fischer 
http://www.troubleshooting-tex.de/