HTML vs. PDF

A revenue figure means little without its year, unit and comparison. In a PDF, readers can use table headings to identify these details. For screen readers, search engines and LLMs, the connection between headings and values also needs to be structured. HTML makes that connection explicit in the code.

HTML explains the structure.

PDF positions text and graphics on pages. Tags can identify headings and tables and define the reading order. When tags are missing or incorrect, software may read the text but cannot reliably tell which information belongs together. In an annual report, this matters as much as the figures themselves. Extracting “250” from a revenue table is not enough: a machine also needs to know the reporting year, currency and business segment. In well-structured HTML, table headers make clear which of these details apply to each figure.

Looks accessible. Is it?

A properly structured and checked PDF can meet WCAG requirements. As the University of Melbourne points out, accessible and inaccessible PDFs can look identical. Accessibility fixes take time and may be lost when the PDF is exported again. For content published online in just one format, the university recommends HTML.

HTML first. PDF alongside.

Google can index PDFs. HTML offers more scope for linked topic pages, descriptive titles and clearly defined sections.

A PDF is still needed for downloads, print and regulatory requirements. It does not need to disappear for HTML to become the primary online report. The key is to publish the same approved content in both formats.

This is where L•Sync closes the gap: connecting existing source systems with a structured HTML-based online report and keeping publishing channels synchronised, without a second manual transfer process.