From: Scott Bryce on
dorayme wrote:
> Well, I have forgotten the context of this remark of mine. I was just
> saying, if I recall, that there are other valid and realistic reasons
> other than printing for the occasional or limited use of PDFs on
> website.


And even though I stated as a rule that PDFs should only be used when
the content is intended to be printed, I have no problem with occasional
exceptions if a competent developer has good reasons for making them.
From: dorayme on
In article <hsfcr5$7k9$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
Scott Bryce <sbryce(a)scottbryce.com> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
> > Well, I have forgotten the context of this remark of mine. I was just
> > saying, if I recall, that there are other valid and realistic reasons
> > other than printing for the occasional or limited use of PDFs on
> > website.
>
>
> And even though I stated as a rule that PDFs should only be used when
> the content is intended to be printed, I have no problem with occasional
> exceptions if a competent developer has good reasons for making them.

Fine. I think it is often the case that developers stick in PDFs
precisely because they do not have to make them. They just shove
them on the server and provide a link, job done! If they are
ridiculous in size and not meant for printing, it is almost no
work to export them to lower res the pictures.

--
dorayme
From: dorayme on
In article
<michelle-DA7732.16341512052010(a)62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <hsfcr5$7k9$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
> Scott Bryce <sbryce(a)scottbryce.com> wrote:
>
> > And even though I stated as a rule that PDFs should only be used when
> > the content is intended to be printed, I have no problem with occasional
> > exceptions if a competent developer has good reasons for making them.
>
> PDFs were designed as a means to exchange documents between various systems
> and software; that's why it's named what it is: Portable Document Format.

I am sure Scott knows this. The dispute is in the context of an
agreed idea that it is not a generally best practice thing to put
a PDF up on a web page where web viewing is the intention if the
time and money is available to do the job properly in HTML and
CSS.

--
dorayme
From: Scott Bryce on
dorayme wrote:
> In article
> <michelle-DA7732.16341512052010(a)62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
> Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote:
>> PDFs were designed as a means to exchange documents between various
>> systems and software; that's why it's named what it is: Portable
>> Document Format.
>
> I am sure Scott knows this. The dispute is in the context of an
> agreed idea that it is not a generally best practice thing to put a
> PDF up on a web page where web viewing is the intention if the time
> and money is available to do the job properly in HTML and CSS.


Exactly. I jumped in when someone suggested PDf as an a alternative to
HTML to accomplish cross browser compatibility of complex screen
layouts. That I would not consider a good use of PDF.
From: Phillip Jones on
Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<hseju3$1k7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
> Phillip Jones<pjones1(a)kimbanet.com> wrote:
>
>>> But I just checked the list of plugins in my copy of Safari, and I
>>> didn't see any for PDFs, not did I see any from Adobe.
>>>
>> There are two places to put plugins. one is in the main Library>
>> Internet-plugins
>
> Regardless of where they are placed, they would be listed in the Installed
> Plug-ins window of Safari, and there are no PDF plugins listed in that
> window.
>
> I checked both internet plugin locations in the Finder, and here are no pdf
> plugins in either place.
>
> And as a final check, I unchecked "enable plug-ins" in Safari's
> preferences, and still could view PDFs.
>
That means that Safari can read PDF's natively.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net mailto:pjones1(a)kimbanet.com