A PDF may look organized while presenting a confusing sequence to someone using assistive technology. Preparing the source document thoughtfully is usually more manageable than treating accessibility as a final cosmetic adjustment.
This is an office workflow checklist, not a legal opinion or a claim of conformance. Complex forms, tables and high-stakes public documents may need a qualified accessibility review. Use it within the broader business PDF handoff plan.
Make the source structure explicit
Use the authoring application's heading and list features for actual headings and lists. A larger bold line may look like a heading without carrying that structural meaning. Keep the hierarchy understandable and avoid introducing a heading level merely to obtain a visual size.
Write link text that explains the destination or action. Provide meaningful descriptions for images that communicate information, and distinguish decorative material. Review tables for understandable relationships rather than using them as a general page-layout device.
Run the source checker and review its results
Microsoft's accessible PDF guidance recommends checking the source before export and retaining document-structure tags in supported export options. Follow the instructions for the particular application and platform in use; menus and capabilities can differ.
Resolve findings that you understand and record those needing specialist attention. An automated check is one input. It does not establish that the wording is understandable, the reading sequence makes sense or every user's needs are met.
Inspect the exported PDF, not only the source
Open the output and review its navigation and reading sequence. Headings, lists, tables, links and images should retain their intended relationships. Check more than the first page, especially where columns, sidebars or complex layouts appear.
W3C explains that tag order is central to PDF reading order. A visually obvious column layout can still produce an unsuitable sequence. W3C also provides a heading-tag technique. These are technical guidance, not a certification for your file.
Use a reader-centered test
Try navigating the document without depending only on the visual layout. Check that link destinations make sense and that the sequence preserves the meaning. Where the workflow calls for assistive-technology testing, use the agreed tools and record the result. Ask a qualified reviewer about complex or uncertain behavior rather than guessing.
Handle scanned material as a separate case
OCR can provide text, but it does not by itself establish a complete accessible structure. First check page completeness and recognized text. Then address the structure and reading order the receiving audience needs.
When an editable source exists, request it through the approved process. Avoid creating a fresh scan of a digital document merely because that is the office's familiar route. Converting a good source into page images can add unnecessary work to the review.
Preserve the checked export through delivery
Compression, merging or further editing can change the tested file. Repeat the relevant checks after those transformations. If multiple outputs are required, record which checks apply to each one rather than using a single generic “passed” label.
Connect the result to the release record. If an issue cannot be resolved before the deadline, escalate the specific limitation to the document owner and agree on an appropriate alternative format. Do not quietly replace the intended deliverable or label an unreviewed file accessible.
Editorial review: October 22, 2026. These proposed office checklists do not certify document accuracy, accessibility or legal compliance. Use current guidance for your approved software.