Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
Hi Daniel, on Monday, 2005-10-24 at 11:33:47, you wrote: Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps, added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself. This is obviously a few years old; the guy still has a point about ergonomics but I don't have any problems with PDF files on Linux today. The huge advantage PDF has over PS that it's searchable and accomodates bitmap graphics with decent compression. Put a 300dpi A5-size JPEG into a TeX document and run it through pdfTeX---and then convert it to PS... For something that prints nicely and is still accessible, there is just no usable alternative. regards Matthias -- I prefer encrypted and signed messages. KeyID: 90CF8389 Fingerprint: 8E1F 1081 A466 2946 B98A B9E2 099F 3B91 pgpEAykeEsSA8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:57:31 +0200 Hans-Werner Hilse wrote: Hi, On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:10:56 +1300 Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not sure if font embedding is possible in a .ps document. Of course it is. I think people using laser printers would have complained a lot otherwise... -hwh yes true, well that dismisses Chris' theory :) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
Zhang Weiwu wrote: Hello. I have got a lot (much more) ps files and PDF files since I start to use Linux. In the past there were mostly doc files but now I always prefer to have a PS or PDF copy to ease the compatibility pain. And looks linux people always prefer to send me a PS or PDF document. Because I always save two copies of every of my document, one in original format (eg. odt) and another in printable format for my colleagues in case they don't have the Linux fonts and software. Here comes the question should I keep a PS copy or PDF copy. I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because: * easier to find acrobat reader; * can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo; * possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost; * not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension; * different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told can be taken to press house * easy to convert to PS format when needed. Here comes the question: if the above all stands true, why do I ever need PS format at all? There might be some reasons to keep this format still existing. Perhaps in other areas, other then office work. So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format. Now welcome for suggestions. I think the key to this whole story is the second to last line above. for typical office workers says it all. I think you are quite right to say you can forget PS format. You could probably stick with pdf if you only need the documents for 2-5 years. PDF is very much industry standard for archiving, and isn't going away soon. I would *definitely* think about keeping documents (if you are going to go to the trouble of archiving and all that) in text format, probably xml like odt or even m$ xml, because if the data are valuable then finding something to read it in 50 years will probably be difficult. The EU is looking like it will go that way just like Massachusetts - no reason why you shouldn't either. You will ALWAYS be able to find or create a tool to get decently printed and onscreen presentation from well marked up plaintext. Cheers Antoine -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:04:13 +0200 Antoine wrote: So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format. Now welcome for suggestions. I think the key to this whole story is the second to last line above. for typical office workers says it all. I think you are quite right to say you can forget PS format. You could probably stick with pdf if you only need the documents for 2-5 years. PDF is very much industry standard for archiving, and isn't going away soon. I would *definitely* think about keeping documents (if you are going to go to the trouble of archiving and all that) in text format, probably xml like odt or even m$ xml, because if the data are valuable then finding something to read it in 50 years will probably be difficult. The EU is looking like it will go that way just like Massachusetts - no reason why you shouldn't either. You will ALWAYS be able to find or create a tool to get decently printed and onscreen presentation from well marked up plaintext. Don't forget that some documents that a typical office worker wants to archive may not be available as text. They may be scanned or fax documents. Our scanner /printer at the office outputs in .pdf or .tiff. I could build a fax server to receive documents and save them in .tiff or pdf. Suddenly it makes sense to save a whiole lot of stuff as pdf. As you say, it isn't going away soon! Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
Hi, On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:10:56 +1300 Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not sure if font embedding is possible in a .ps document. Of course it is. I think people using laser printers would have complained a lot otherwise... -hwh -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
Hello. I have got a lot (much more) ps files and PDF files since I start to use Linux. In the past there were mostly doc files but now I always prefer to have a PS or PDF copy to ease the compatibility pain. And looks linux people always prefer to send me a PS or PDF document. Because I always save two copies of every of my document, one in original format (eg. odt) and another in printable format for my colleagues in case they don't have the Linux fonts and software. Here comes the question should I keep a PS copy or PDF copy. I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because: * easier to find acrobat reader; * can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo; * possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost; * not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension; * different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told can be taken to press house * easy to convert to PS format when needed. Here comes the question: if the above all stands true, why do I ever need PS format at all? There might be some reasons to keep this format still existing. Perhaps in other areas, other then office work. So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format. Now welcome for suggestions. P.S. another quesiton I happen wish to have an answer: in one case, I have to keep PS format because, I can print booklet (brochure) in OOO2 right the way I expected, but if I carry this brochure to my colleague, and he doesn't have openoffice, then I try to export to PDF format, and found there is no 'brochure' option in exporting, also there is no 'brochure' option in Acrobat Reader printing dialogue box, so it's clear if I export to PDF format I will never be able to print it in brochure style on a normal PC, so I have to print to PS file and carry it. But so far this is the only case I think I need PS format. If I only exported PDF format, can I still print a brochure? The difficulty in printing brochure is you have to make correct page order. -- Zhang Weiwu CEO Real Softservice International business: http://www.realss.com International sales:0086 10 84606011 Inland business:http://www.realss.cn Inland sales call: 0086 592 2099987 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
On 10/23/05, Zhang Weiwu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello. I have got a lot (much more) ps files and PDF files since I start to use Linux. In the past there were mostly doc files but now I always prefer to have a PS or PDF copy to ease the compatibility pain. And looks linux people always prefer to send me a PS or PDF document. Because I always save two copies of every of my document, one in original format (eg. odt) and another in printable format for my colleagues in case they don't have the Linux fonts and software. Here comes the question should I keep a PS copy or PDF copy. I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because: * easier to find acrobat reader; * can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo; * possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost; * not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension; * different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told can be taken to press house * easy to convert to PS format when needed. Here comes the question: if the above all stands true, why do I ever need PS format at all? There might be some reasons to keep this format still existing. Perhaps in other areas, other then office work. So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format. Now welcome for suggestions. P.S. another quesiton I happen wish to have an answer: in one case, I have to keep PS format because, I can print booklet (brochure) in OOO2 right the way I expected, but if I carry this brochure to my colleague, and he doesn't have openoffice, then I try to export to PDF format, and found there is no 'brochure' option in exporting, also there is no 'brochure' option in Acrobat Reader printing dialogue box, so it's clear if I export to PDF format I will never be able to print it in brochure style on a normal PC, so I have to print to PS file and carry it. But so far this is the only case I think I need PS format. If I only exported PDF format, can I still print a brochure? The difficulty in printing brochure is you have to make correct page order. -- Zhang Weiwu CEO Real Softservice International business: http://www.realss.com International sales:0086 10 84606011 Inland business:http://www.realss.cn Inland sales call: 0086 592 2099987 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/why-not-pdf.html Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps, added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
On Monday 24 October 2005 08:33, Daniel da Veiga wrote: Um, ps is itself proprietary. Technically, adobe still owns the patent, don't they? Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps, added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- John Jolet Your On-Demand IT Department 512-762-0729 www.jolet.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
On 10/24/05, John Jolet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Monday 24 October 2005 08:33, Daniel da Veiga wrote: Um, ps is itself proprietary. Technically, adobe still owns the patent, don't they? Yeah, my mistake. Still, postscript was always more portable than pdf (IMO). Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps, added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- John Jolet Your On-Demand IT Department 512-762-0729 www.jolet.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
In general, I think it is pretty straight forward to go from PDF to postscript, and PDF seems easier to access for Windows users, so if you can store a PDF file as your displayable format then I don't think you need to also store the postscipt. There are occasions, however, when PDF output isn't an option and so postcript is necessary. For example, I have yet to find a way to get TeX ducuments which include TeXdraw diagrams into PDF without losing all the graphics. Does anyone know if gs or something similar is available for windows? Regards, DigbyT On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 12:22:04PM -0200, Daniel da Veiga wrote: On 10/24/05, John Jolet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Monday 24 October 2005 08:33, Daniel da Veiga wrote: Um, ps is itself proprietary. Technically, adobe still owns the patent, don't they? Yeah, my mistake. Still, postscript was always more portable than pdf (IMO). Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps, added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself. -- Digby R. S. Tarvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.digbyt.com -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
Digby Tarvin wrote: snip Does anyone know if gs or something similar is available for windows? You could try googling for gs windows. Check out: http://www.google.com/search?q=gs+windows HTH, Dave. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
I am not 100% sure but I seem to recall someone telling me that pdfs embed any fonts that are used, whereas ps files expect the fonts in question to be on the machine that you look at the ps file with. This could be a strong argument in favor of pdf files if you are sending the files to others. Does anyone know if that is correct or if I am remembering wrong? Here comes the question: if the above all stands true, why do I ever need PS format at all? There might be some reasons to keep this format still existing. Perhaps in other areas, other then office work. So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
Hi, Sorry for another tree of answers, but the others seemed a bit fuzzy to me... On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 16:08:50 +0800 (CST) Zhang Weiwu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because I always save two copies of every of my document, one in original format (eg. odt) and another in printable format for my colleagues in case they don't have the Linux fonts and software. Here comes the question should I keep a PS copy or PDF copy. Note that PS is an interpreted language. PDF is a pure document format, no program flow involved there. You can do pretty funny things using Postscript you won't ever be able to do with PDF. I think Postscript even has a Random Generator. So if you do serious Postscript programming, PDF isn't an option ;-) PDF can be thought as the final result of a computation, Postscript describes the computation itself. I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because: * easier to find acrobat reader; Hm. Let's turn this into: On most computers you'll find a PDF reader today. * can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo; Hm, produced by OOo, but used?!? Can be something to think of when it comes to reading on PDAs. * possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost; Not impossible with Postscript - doesn't have Gnome's new doc viewer have such a feature? Or something on KDE? Not sure, though... * not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension; But you still have the PDF version that _may_ prevent you from opening the PDFs on older Acrobat Readers when chosing a too high level. * different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told can be taken to press house No difference to postscript here - besides the new layers feature * easy to convert to PS format when needed. This is true the other way, too. Here comes the question: if the above all stands true, why do I ever need PS format at all? There might be some reasons to keep this format still existing. Perhaps in other areas, other then office work. Because that's what your printer interpretes? Or its network server thingy? So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format. Except for piping it to the printer, yes. Now welcome for suggestions. PDF is fine. Hm, and if you want something very future-proof, keep a plain text copy. This isn't a joke, let's discuss this in 30 years or so... P.S. another quesiton I happen wish to have an answer: in one case, I have to keep PS format because, I can print booklet (brochure) in OOO2 right the way I expected, but if I carry this brochure to my colleague, and he doesn't have openoffice, then I try to export to PDF format, and found there is no 'brochure' option in exporting,[. emerge pdftk read about it on http://www.accesspdf.com, or check out the Multivalent Tools (google will tell you the address). ...] also there is no 'brochure' option in Acrobat Reader printing dialogue box, so it's clear if I export to PDF format I will never be able to print it in brochure style on a normal PC, so I have to print to PS file and carry it. But so far this is the only case I think I need PS format. If I only exported PDF format, can I still print a brochure? The difficulty in printing brochure is you have to make correct page order. Of course. You can create a new PDF with above mentioned tools that has pages from the other PDF layouted in a certain way in the new PDF. -hwh -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:58:10 -0500 Chris Gottbrath wrote: I am not 100% sure but I seem to recall someone telling me that pdfs embed any fonts that are used, whereas ps files expect the fonts in question to be on the machine that you look at the ps file with. This could be a strong argument in favor of pdf files if you are sending the files to others. Does anyone know if that is correct or if I am remembering wrong? Certainly it is possible to embed all the fonts in a pdf, and this is often a good idea. It's not always the default though. How you do it will probably depend which tool/library you are using to produce the .pdf. I am not sure if font embedding is possible in a .ps document. -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
