"Code Sandwiches"

[spir]

On 03/10/2011 08:15 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg at gmx.com>  wrote in message
> news:mailman.2411.1299739219.4748.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>> On Wednesday 09 March 2011 22:18:53 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg at gmx.com>  wrote in message
>>> news:mailman.2409.1299728378.4748.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>>>
>>>> On Wednesday 09 March 2011 13:30:27 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>>> But why is it that academic authors have a chronic inability to
>>>>> release
>>>>> any
>>>>> form of text without first cramming it into a goddamn PDF of all
>>>>> things?
>>>>> This is one example of why I despise Adobe's predominance: PDF is
>>>>> fucking useless for anything but printing, and no one seems to know
>>>>> it.
>>>>> Isn't it about time the ivory tower learned about Mosaic? The web is
>>>>> more than a PDF-distribution tool...Really! It is! Welcome to the
>>>>> mid-90's. Sheesh.
>>>>
>>>> And what format would you _want_ it in? PDF is _way_ better than having
>>>> a
>>>> file
>>>> for any particular word processor. What else would you pick? HTML?
>>>> Yuck.
>>>> How
>>>> would _that_ be any better than a PDF? These are _papers_ after all,
>>>> not
>>>> some
>>>> web article. They're either written up in a word processor or with
>>>> latex.
>>>> Distributing them as PDFs makes perfect sense.
>>>
>>> They're text. With minor formatting. That alone makes html better. Html
>>> is
>>> lousy for a lot of things, but formatted text is the one thing it's
>>> always
>>> been perfectly good at. And frankly I think I'd *rather* go with pretty
>>> much any word processing format if the only other option was pdf.
>>
>> I'm afraid that I don't understand at all. The only time that I would
>> consider
>> html better than a pdf is if the pdf isn't searchable (and most papers
>> _are_
>> searchable). And I _definitely_ don't like dealing with whatever word
>> processor
>> format someone happens to be using. PDF is nice and universal. I don't
>> have to
>> worry about whether I have the appropriate fonts or if I even have a
>> program
>> which can read their word processor format of choice. I don't really have
>> any
>> gripes with PDF at all.
>>
>
> PDF: *Complete* inability to adapt appropriately to the viewing device,
> *completely* useless page breaks and associated top/bottom page margins in
> places that have absolutely *no* use for them, no flowing layout, frequent
> horizontal scrolling, poor (if any) linking, inability for the reader to
> choose the fonts/etc that *they* find readable. Oh, and ever tried reading
> one of those pdf's that use a multi-column layout? All of this together
> makes PDF the #1 worst document format for viewing on a PC. All for what?
> Increased accuracy the *few* times it ever gets printed? Outside of
> print-shops, pdf needs to die a horrible death.

Agreed. pdf (or maybe rather the more powerful ps) should be an end-of-chain 
format just before printing. Delivering pdf docs for anyhting else makes no 
sense. pdf is a printing format (a poor one, according to typo professional, 
please ask); nothing else.
Also, nowadays, it's no more necessary to use ps or pdf to get (correct) 
printing. Nearly anything can be composed and printed as is. An exception may 
be complex math formulas (in latex indeed). Even then, one can precompose them 
into plain graphics.

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com