save word doc as pdf options

hi!

i'm saving large word document (over 100 pages) pdf, using word 2007 , acrobat 9 pro. then, using acrobat final-stage accessibility edits.

 

there number of ways save file pdf, , i'm curious differences are.

1. can save word doc using "acrobat" ribbon- button "create pdf" , play around "preferences" when doing so.

2. can go 'pizza box' , "save as" , hit "adobe pdf."

     (i'm pretty sure same thing 1)

     when 1 or 2, conversion takes long time , freezes computer. i've been doing following:

3. "save as" , "pdf or xps"- button little document wearing belt around waist? funny button.

     doing converts file pdf lot quicker 1 or 2. can tell, fine job- carries on alt text, tags, etc.

     3a. also- there's option when save way make pdf "iso 19005-1 compliant (pdf/a)" mean anything?

 

questions:

- difference between these saving options? , why 3 faster?!

- option best creating accessible pdfs word documents (or same)?

 

thanks!

hi,

for #1 –
this uses adobe pdfmaker.
if "enable accessibility , reflow tagged adobe pdf" selected you'll create tagged output pdf word file. how well-formed depends on how diligently built-in headings , styles used.

 

for #2 –
'pizza box' > "save as" > "adobe pdf" passes word file through adobe printer distiller pdf.
no tagged output pdf way file not being processed adobe pdfmaker provides tag management.

for #3 –
'pizza box' > "save as" (mouse hover, no click) > pdf or xps (click)
in 'publish pdf or xps' dialog, click on "options..." button.
in options dialog, select "document structure tags accessibilty"
(don't forget provide word file meta data in document properties , select "document properties" in options dialog).
give output pdf bookmarks selecting "create bookmarks using" choice.
click ok.
back in the  'publish pdf or xps' dialog, confirm "standard (publishing online , printing)" selected (the default).
if want view pdf upon creation, select "open file after publishing".
click publish button.
output pdf tagged.
process has improved since initial release.
on whole, still prefer use pdfmaker; but, office 2007 routine viable alternative.
an end-user "win" due adobe's work iso create iso standard pdf.

#1 & #3 process time function of authored – short-simple, long-complex, adherence well-formed template , built-in headings/styles, willy-nilly, etc.
you have run statistically valid sample of same word files through each see has run-time , provides structure tree requires minimal post-processing.
although less post-processing may not 'good thing' if few activities have gnarly.

for #3a –
pdf "iso 19005-1 compliant (pdf/a)"
the iso standard long term archival grade electronic files (pdf, of course <g>).
asking question indicates not in need of providing content in word pdf/a.

questions
– 'speed' of output needs more post-processing acrobat pro may not thing.
–  'better' tagged output pdf...
that depends.
i prefer adobe pdfmaker's output of <table>, <note>, dealings headings, ability appropriately nest elements, etc.

i'd 2 or 3 of same word files each way.
then post-process assure pdf structure tree compliant requirements of iso 32000-1.
if pdf iso 32000-1"good" solid accessibility/section 508.
for each, walk tree 'highlight' selected.
if checking at, use recent release. old stuff (any of software house) not going able "qc" processed current standards.
after this, throw chicken bones decide.

 

fwiw, i've found framemaker / acrobat pro better tool set tagged output of pdf , requisite post-processing.

be well...

More discussions in Acrobat Windows (read-only)

adobe