On Fri, 2 Apr 1999 21:33:44 +0300 hammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, wrote:
> For me the PDF/proprietary debate is long from over.
> For instance, on what "John P. Tomany" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> on: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 10:06:52 -0500
>
> > IMO, there is no better way than PDF for governments and businesses to
> > provide forms, instructions, and other data. A PDF file printed on your
> > home printer is absolutely identical to the original printed version,
> > regardless of the platform used to retrieve it. No other software/method
> > can say that.
>
> Now it may be justified to have "forms" reproduced to the pixel
> precisely - those then which someone would have to fill in, send
> (snail) back so they could read (perhaps) with a scanner (or chequed
> by some bureaucracy). [Though this could be done as well using fax if
> there's much of a hurry.]
>
> But already with "instructions" this seems less evident as long as
> they consist of text. And it's completely obsolete with any type of
> "information" consisting of text, like laws, rulings, authorities'
> decision on this or that. Or, for that matter, transscripts of
> parliamentary debates.
Well, I both agree and disagree. I recently downloaded Dolby
Laboratories' "Frequently Asked Questions about Dolby Digital" in pdf-
format. This was my first attempt at using pdf, and I was rather
surprised about what you could do with it. When printed out on my
small Canon bubble-jet printer, it looked like a xerox-copy of a
printed brochure, with three-column text in various fonts, lots of
illustrations and, as far as I can understand, with exactly the same
page layout as was intended.
I recall when I last year tried to read, with Bobcat/Lynx, another
Dolby document in html, with illustrations downloaded separately as
gifs...
Or, for that matter, when I printed out another html-document, with
a few illustrations, using Netscape 3.01 and Opera 3.60. They did
*not* look the same.
And, as for instructions: A friend of mine gave me some network cards
his company had scrapped for something newer, faster. I found an
owner's manual at digital's site, in pdf-format. Very useful, as the
illustrations were in place. With text pointing at illustrations
(pictures, diagrams, whatever) it could be rather meaningless to read
without those illustrations at hand. In such a case I can understand
why the company doesn't put up a text-only version too.
On the other hand, for text-only documents of the kind Heimo
mentions: laws, regulations etc., I agree that these should
preferrably also be available as plain text, which would also be much
quicker in downloading as these pdf-files can be rather "bloated".
> The effect of this is a hardly disguised form of "secret" laws -
> rather a sign of dictatorial regimes; while among the constituing
> elements of democarcy there's the clear conditions for "laws" (i.e.,
> all sorts of rulings pertaining to, and information concerning, the
> public at large) to be "public".
I think you are over-reacting a bit here. There is certainly not a
conspiracy here to keep laws secret for the unfortunate ones who
cannot afford the latest in computer equipment. I think rather it is
sheer stupidity, some laziness and perhaps a (misinformed?) notion
that "everybody" who owns a computer also can run Adobe Acrobat
Reader. Besides, there are probably rather few who really cannot. It
doesn't take the very latest in equipment - a 486 with a VGA-screen
will do fine.
Anyone who has tried with something less than that? And what about
non-Windows-OSes? Is Acrobat available for OS/2, MacOS, Linux et al?
Lars-Einar Jansson
Stockholm, Sweden
Stockholm, Sweden
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
