# How should you publish a floor plan PDF with a text companion?

Publish a builder floor plan PDF with a reviewed HTML text companion, a short image alternative and a revision label. Check the PDF separately for readable text, structure and image descriptions. AgAI Labs proposes the worksheet below to record source permission, room relationships, test evidence and unresolved publication issues.

## What information should a plan image convey in text?

Begin with the buyer question the drawing answers. A public plan overview might explain how the entry connects to living spaces. A detail might show a separate guest area. List the relationships that the approved drawing supports before writing a description.

The [W3C guidance for complex images](https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/complex/) describes a short alternative paired with a longer description. The short alternative identifies the image and can direct readers to the full description. The longer description conveys essential information, including meaningful relationships. Apply that approach to the purpose of your plan image.

Keep the short alternative focused on identification. Put the room sequence, connections and relevant distinctions in visible HTML nearby. Use headings and paragraphs that readers can reach directly. Do not put a complete plan narrative into one image attribute.

Separate a room label from a design conclusion. A label can establish that a space is a study. It does not establish sound isolation. A drawn doorway does not establish a usable clearance. Refer uncertain design interpretation to the qualified project reviewer.

The [plan library guide](/articles/builder-websites/plan-library-pages/) covers plan status and comparison fields. This worksheet records how one approved plan version becomes a public drawing and text companion.

## What belongs beside the PDF download?

Give the download a descriptive label containing the plan identity, level and revision. Identify the file as a PDF. Add its verified file size when useful. Keep the same identity on the page, inside the document and in the review record.

Place the HTML text companion beside the download or provide a clearly labeled link to it. Keep it available without requiring the PDF to open. State the public plan status in visible text. Identify any approved limits on the drawing's intended use.

Record copyright ownership, publication permission and the exact approved public version before uploading either asset. Possession of a drawing is insufficient evidence for this proposed release process. Confirm permission to publish the image, the PDF and the accompanying description. Keep private project details outside the public files.

### How can you copy the publication worksheet?

Copy these fields into your review record. Use one record for each publication version. Repeat the relationship and document-check fields when several items need separate evidence. Replace every placeholder before accepting the record.

```
Plan identity and revision: [public label, level, source revision]
Room relationships: [observable connection and source location]
Permitted source: [copyright holder, permission record, approved file]
Text description: [short alternative, HTML companion, revision]
Document check: [test, tool or reader, result, evidence location]
Reviewer: [responsible role, review date, decision]
Unresolved issue: [question, owner, publication hold or resolution]
```

Use the table as a compact review view. Keep permission evidence in the appropriate private project record. Publish only the plan information approved for public use.

| Plan identity and revision | Room relationships | Permitted source | Text description | Document check | Reviewer | Unresolved issue |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Plan, level, revision] | [Connection; drawing reference] | [Rights evidence; approved public file] | [Alternative; companion version] | [Test; result; evidence] | [Role; date; decision] | [Question; owner; hold] |
| Fictional Example Plan A, entry level, revision A | Entry hall opens into living area | Invented practice brief only; no real drawing permission asserted | Draft below; revision A | Not performed; no PDF supplied | Practice roles: project reviewer and document tester; decisions pending | Unlabeled dashed region; hold example publication |

## How do you describe a plan without inventing details?

Use this fictional source brief for practice only. Example Plan A, entry level, revision A, shows an entry hall opening into a living area. A kitchen adjoins that area. A side hall reaches a study and bedroom. An unlabeled dashed region appears beyond the living area.

This brief defines the entire example. No real drawing or PDF accompanies it. It supplies no dimensions, doorway clearances, site orientation or construction details. The following text demonstrates a draft companion, not an approved description of an actual home.

### What would the short alternative say?

Fictional Example Plan A, entry level, revision A. Room relationships are described in the text companion below.

That wording assumes the companion is below the image. Change the location wording if your page puts the description elsewhere.

### What would the longer HTML companion say?

**Fictional Example Plan A: entry level, revision A.** This practice example describes the relationships stated in an invented source brief.

The entry hall opens into the living area. The kitchen adjoins the living area. A side hall leads to a study and a bedroom.

The source brief does not establish dimensions, site orientation, doorway clearances or construction details. An unlabeled dashed region beyond the living area remains unidentified. Its use and connection need project review.

Do not rename the dashed region as a porch. Do not call the layout accessible, approved for construction or suitable for a particular lot. Those conclusions exceed the fictional source. Put the unanswered question in the worksheet with an owner.

A real companion needs a project reviewer to compare every sentence with the approved public drawing. Check labels, level references and connections. If sources disagree, hold the affected description until the reviewer resolves the conflict.

## Which document checks need a person?

Treat image alternatives, the HTML companion, selectable text and document structure as separate checks. Selecting a room label proves only that selection works there. It does not establish a useful reading sequence or a correct description.

[W3C technique PDF1](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/pdf/PDF1) addresses image alternatives in tagged PDFs through an `/Alt` entry. Its test includes inspecting alternatives or reading them with a screen reader. Review the exported PDF itself. An alternative on the website image does not demonstrate that the document contains one.

Use the following sequence as a proposed publication check. Record the file revision and evidence for each result.

1. **Confirm the source.** Match the candidate file to the approved public drawing and permission record.

2. **Compare the text.** Ask the project reviewer to verify each room relationship in the companion.

3. **Inspect selectable text.** Select and copy important labels from the PDF. Compare the result with the visible drawing.

4. **Inspect structure.** Review document tags, headings where present, and the sequence of labels and descriptions.

5. **Read the document.** Use a screen reader to check image alternatives and reading order. Record the reader and PDF application.

6. **Test the published page locally.** Reach the download and companion by keyboard. Inspect the description at enlarged text sizes.

7. **Record the decision.** Attach observed results and unresolved barriers to the worksheet before requesting publication approval.

Automated results belong in the evidence field, alongside manual findings. A detected alternative-text entry does not establish that its wording conveys the correct plan relationships. A person must judge that meaning. No checklist here guarantees accessibility conformance.

The [builder website accessibility guide](/articles/builder-websites/builder-website-accessibility/) covers broader page tasks. Keep this record tied to the specific PDF and companion you tested.

## What stays held before publication?

Hold a plan when publication rights, source revision or essential room relationships remain unresolved. Hold a claimed document test result when nobody performed the test. Assign each open issue to the role that can resolve it.

Keep design interpretation with the qualified project reviewer. Keep document testing with the assigned accessibility reviewer. The publishing owner in your [owned website process](/process/owned-website/) checks that both decisions refer to the same candidate files. Neither decision substitutes for the other.

When the plan changes, create a new worksheet version. Recheck affected descriptions and document behavior. Preserve the prior decision in the project record so the team can identify which public version it covered.

Use the [custom builder website page guide](/guides/custom-builder-website-pages/) to place the companion within the plan page. Keep unresolved internal comments and private permission records out of that public text.

## What else should a plan publisher check?

### Does an HTML companion replace PDF testing?

An HTML text companion gives readers a separate description of a builder floor plan. Test the PDF independently for its text, structure, image alternatives and reading behavior. Record both results against the same revision.

### Can a checker approve the plan description?

An automated check cannot establish that a builder plan description matches the approved drawing's meaning. Have a qualified project reviewer verify room relationships and resolve uncertain labels before publication.

### Should an unclear room label be guessed?

Keep an unclear room label unresolved in the builder plan worksheet. Record its source location and responsible reviewer. Hold the affected description until an approved source resolves it.

### Can the fictional example be used for a real plan?

The fictional companion demonstrates a writing method. Replace its content with facts from your permitted public plan version. Review the resulting text and PDF before using either for a real project.