Also iMedConsent(tm) (which deals with documents as our output, input, and everything in-between) supports TIFF and PDF primarily. Although we allow you to output something like JPEG but we don't recommend it.
If you have an imaging solution that holds on to TIFFs, you are guaranteeing the state of the TIFF within your system. Once the file leaves your system (to be sent down to the client for printing or what not), you can't protect the file from alterations. PDFs support locking and signing. We digitally sign our PDFs with the author's digital signature. At one hospital they're signing the entire PDF with a single cert stamped as "THE HOSPITAL" to certify it was accepted at the server level. But it's very possible to sign it several times, one for each wet signature in addition to layers within the system (by client, by server, by imaging storage system, etc). Each one verifying the state of the document and ensuring that it wasn't tampered with. This is addition to any hashing and security in place at the storage system level. David Sommers, Architect | Dialog Medical -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Berman Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 9:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] ScanSoft graphic component and The Gimp On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 21:29 -0400, Kevin Toppenberg wrote: > Todd, > > Tell me about why .pdf is important. > Because PDF is the natural choice for text documents, just as TIFF was 10 years ago. > I could attach any file I want to a note. The issue will be the > generation of thumbnails, and also the display of the .pdf documents. > Yup, that is the issue. Currently for our solution, I believe we will be generating a thumbnail image of the first page for the thumbnail, and then showing the entire pdf when it is opened. > Are you going to host the .pdf viewer in your application? It seems > that would also make deployment more difficult. > Somewhat kinda, we are in a unique situation, but we have a library that we are planning on using and distributing to allow pdf viewing. But no, we wont be using adobe's stuff, and it shouldn't add any real issues for deployment for us. > Why would this be better to do than just having a graphic image of the document? > Because there are good odds that PDF attachments are going to be very common. Right now, e-fax (which gives faxes as PDFs) and pdf scanners are very common, and will become more so. We will still support multipage TIFFs for compatibilities sake, but I would assume we will be recommending PDF over multipage TIFFs. --Todd ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
