[rfc-i] transition plan for choosing alternative format for RFCs
hallam at gmail.com
Tue Mar 27 05:51:53 PDT 2012
Isn't PDF a turing complete language?
So can't it do anything?
So why not implement a HTML interpreter/formatter in PDF?
Why not? Because it would be stupid. Nobody has a PDF creator that
works that way today.
What is important is not what the format can do under the exact right
circumstances but what text that presents right can't do.
With HTML4 it is necessary to have certain constraints to ensure that
the archive format supports recovery of the editing source text but
they are fairly easy to comply with. It takes a lot of time and effort
(place positioned text) to not comply.
With PDF it is necessary to use very specialized tools to create the
exact right output desired.
If PDF/A is the standard then any PDF/A compliant document produced by
a standard tool using standard settings has to be acceptable.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 2012-03-26 13:32, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> On 3/26/2012 12:37 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> On 2012-03-26 11:52, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
>>>> >PDF offers very poor readability on, for example, the Samsung Galaxy
>>>> Nexus I'm using to type this email.
>>>> No, PDF has nothing to do with that.
>>>> The choice of VIEWER that you are using is given you a bad experience
>>>> with that document.
>>>> Don't blame the format for the failings of the viewer…
>>> So what's a PDF viewer you would recommend, for, for instance, Android
>> I was not aware the PDF was equivalent to ePub.
>> I thought PDF impose line lengths and page boundaries, neither of which
>> are constructs appropriate to highly variable viewing environments.
> PDF, when done properly, allows content reflow.
> Best regards, Julian
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest