<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Document Language on Rietta Cybersecurity</title>
    <link>https://rietta.com/glossary/document-language/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Document Language on Rietta Cybersecurity</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>1999-2026 Rietta Inc. All Rights Reserved.</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2026 16:10:44 -0400</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://rietta.com/glossary/document-language/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>The Five Pillars of Information Security (And Why We Audit Accessibility)</title>
      <link>https://rietta.com/blog/five-pillars-infosec-ada-accessibility/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 Jul 2026 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rietta.com/blog/five-pillars-infosec-ada-accessibility/</guid>
      <description>Rietta is a cybersecurity firm. So why have the last three posts on this blog been about missing document titles, undefined languages, and metadata fields in government PDFs? My reasoning comes down to this: accessibility failures are security failures, specifically, they&amp;rsquo;re availability failures, and detecting them at scale is exactly the discipline our industry already practices.&#xA;To explain why, it helps to back up and lay out the actual model we use to reason about security in the first place.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Metadata in WordPerfect: ADA and WCAG 2.1 Compliance</title>
      <link>https://rietta.com/blog/metadata-in-wordperfect-ada-wcag-compliance/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rietta.com/blog/metadata-in-wordperfect-ada-wcag-compliance/</guid>
      <description>Courts throughout the United States still use WordPerfect. So why is metadata still being ignored?&#xA;In our work with State courts, we have come across WordPerfect files, or PDF documents generated from them, with metadata deficiencies: no title (or subject), no author, and so forth. Now that WCAG 2.1 requirements are enforced through ADA Title II, documents without sufficient metadata to assist a user with disabilities using assistive technology are non-compliant with federal law.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Real ADA Title II Findings for Government Documents</title>
      <link>https://rietta.com/blog/real-ada-title-ii-findings/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2026 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rietta.com/blog/real-ada-title-ii-findings/</guid>
      <description>I recently wrote about the upcoming ADA Title II deadline for governments with 50k or more residents in their jurisdiction.&#xA;Overview As we continue to work with Government organizations, Rietta is providing plain language reporting on the issues and tying them directly back to the requirements. Our reports cover a lot of ground, some of which is not talked about in accessibility circles quite enough. For example, we have a very strong argument that using the same title over and over again is not compliant even though accessibility vendors will do that as they seem to be looking at documents one at a time and not corpus wide.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
