Re: [PLUG] DSL saga webpage

[Bill Jonas <bill@billjonas.com>]

On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 12:32:44AM -0400, Doug Crompton wrote:
> With a great deal of info on the web now in PDF format I cannot
> understand why the Linux community is not able to read it?

As Gabe said, unless it's something that I really want or really need
(say, I'm trying to find the technical specifications for a piece of
hardware and the spec sheet in is freaking PDF only), I generally won't
bother with it.  There's a couple of reasons why:

1.) There are extra steps involved.  At a minimum, I have to tell
Mozilla that it's okay to open the file with /usr/bin/xpdf.  At a
maximum, it might mean saving it to a file, starting X, launching
applications, opening the file, etc (since I'm not aware of any console
PDF viewers).  I'll grant you, I could get Acrobat Reader(TM) from Adobe
Systems(TM) and have the plugin for my browser (I did have it for a
while), but its widgets are ugly and it changes the behavior of certain
keys, like up and down.  This leads into the UI issues in #2.

2.) I use my web browser all the time and so I'm highly familiar with
the user interface.  It's fairly customizable.  I can pick elements of
the UI to display or not display, remap keys, filter it, choose my own
fonts, colors, and sizes, etc.  So basically, I have it configured so
that it's easy for me to use and read.  Along comes a PDF... okay, I
need to resize the window, adjust the zoom (because page-at-a-time is
just too damn small to read on my display) factor, fight its UI, etc.
(This last part ties back in with #1, above.)

So, PDFs, which display by default page-at-a-time on my display, are in
general more of a hassle to deal with and harder to read than HTML.  (If
the font's too small on an HTML page, control-+ takes care of it.  With
a PDF viewer, I have to go to the mouse, click a menu, pick an
option...)

Now, there is an exception; sometimes PDFs are nice for graphics-laden
documents that I want to keep around for a while; it's much easier to
keep track of a single file than to keep track of 50, or try to manage
an archival file (.zip, .tar.gz) containing them.  Also, certain
"download, print, fill out, and mail in" types of forms are very suited
for PDF (like IRS or other government forms).

Note that I'm not trying to tell you what to do or how you should do it
or in what manner you must publish your stuff.  Others have expressed
their opinion that unless it's some special case, HTML wins over PDF.  I
happen to agree with those people.  But of course, you're ultimately
making the decision, so it boils down to your call.  I'm just explaining
the practical reasons why I choose HTML documents of which I can easily
alter the presentation for better usability over just-like-the-author's
-intended-viewing PDF when there are magnificently sufficient PDF
viewers available on my chosen computing platform.  And just as it's
your choice as to which format to publish, it's your readers' choice as
to which formats to read.  Which is why publishers generally pick the
formats which are the most popular among readers if they wish their
content to be widely read.

-- 
Bill Jonas    *    bill@billjonas.com    *    http://www.billjonas.com/
"They that can give up  essential  liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."        -- Benjamin Franklin

Attachment: pgpeb3GK0fQI1.pgp
Description: PGP signature