Hi,

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 12:06 AM <jer...@shidel.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 15, 2023, at 10:22 PM, Michael Brutman <mbbrut...@brutman.com> wrote:
> > [..]
> > The only questionable thing I noticed was somebody converted the user 
> > documentation to a 293KB text file.  That strips the formatting, diagrams 
> > and screen shots that I have in the PDF.  Can we not do that in the future? 
> >  Nobody is going to want to wade through a 293KB text file.
>
> I don’t recall the origin of the text version. It is also regarding the 
> 2015-07-05 release and most likely contains outdated information. I will 
> delete it from the GitLab Archive and it won’t be in any future interim 
> builds or OS releases.
>
> I do recall that it was included because PDF documents are not easily viewed 
> under DOS. I don’t think we even provide a PDF viewer at present. We do 
> provide a couple web browsers. I hope you will consider providing an 
> additional version of the documentation in HTML format with future versions.

Yes, that much is pretty obvious. DOS and "portable" document formats
(PDF) do not mix well.

Although we do have older Ghostscript builds (of varying quality, not
all equal in features). RayeR never did publicly finalize his MuPDF
(gfx) build. My cross-build of MuTool is old but kinda works (IIRC).
Georg's 2014 FLTK build of MuPDF is still on SourceForge. I guess
someone used the PDFTOTXT.EXE (?) found in FlWriter? Or was it XPDF?
Maybe I'm thinking of PDFTOHTML.EXE?

I honestly don't recall some of the details. Either way, a text file
as a supplement to a complex PDF could still be useful. But I'm
guessing it's sadly implied that most people also have fancier OSes to
read PDFs from. (I haven't checked lately.)


_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Reply via email to