On 21-Apr-06 Michail Vidiassov wrote: > Portable Document Format (PDF) is set to displace PostScript > as the standard print job transfer and processing format for > Linux, though Linux will maintain PostScript support for a > long time to ensure backward compatibility. > > This switch was agreed upon at last week's Linux Desktop > Printing Summit. Open Source Development Labs (OSDL) and > Linuxprinting.org organized the meeting, which was hosted > by Lanier (a Ricoh corporation) at its Lanier Education > Center in Atlanta. At the meeting there was virtually no > disagreement about the change. > > The fine details will have to be thrashed out over the coming > months, but representatives from CUPS, Ghostscript, > Linuxprinting.org, KDE, GNOME, hardware vendors (present were > people from Epson, HP, IBM, Lanier, Lexmark, Ricoh, Sharp, and > Xerox), and developers of free drivers all agreed that PDF > will give them more power, more reliability, and more control > over the printing process. > > http://applications.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/04/18/2114252 > > Are we ready?
Very interesting, and I had no idea of this until you told us! Thanks! I am perturbed by some of the implications, however. Never mind "backwards compatibility". As things stand at present, PS has advantages over PDF. For one thing, you can write your own PS file from scratch using a text editor. And you can edit any PS file (except for those which have been encrypted, which is unusual, or depend on Hex encoding for graphics blocks etc.). PS is at bottom a plain ASCII format. On the other hand, I've never seen a PDF file that I would want to even think about editing by hand; and while it may be in principle possible to create one by hand I don't think I would like to try that either. The plain fact, in real life, is that editing or creating a PDF file requires specialised software which, to the non-specialised user (including users who could cope with editing PS), is simply a black box. I grant that PDF has resources which PS lacks (the need for PDFmarks in PS which is to be converted to PDF for some of these is proof of that). In my view, the main reason for the emergence of PDF as a "standard" has little to do with these extra resources, however. I think it is due to the fact that PDF files can readily be read on Windows platforms (provided you have the free Acrobat reader, of course), and can also be edited if you have bought the appropriate Adobe software. On the other hand, Windows support for PS has always been grudging at best: you can in the limit import an EPS "graphic" into a Word document, but you can't view it on screen, and you can only print the result successfully on a PS printer. (And when I say "graphic", the EPS could of course simply be text). And heaven help you if you try to edit a PS file in Word ... So, for the sake of making our PSs available to the challenged out there, we have happily converted them to PDF; and the challenged are none the wiser since it still looks good. I harbour fears that this proposed move towards PDF as the standard indicates an impending domination of the capable by the challenged. My only consolation is that, according to Michail's account above, it will be (at peast partially) in good hands; though the evident involvement of commercial interests -- even at the basic level of organisating the meeting -- causes me some disquiet. I'm well aware (being one of them myself) that many people on this list are there because they are survivors from the Age of the Dinosaur (ca. 30 years ago). Unix and troff had shown how things could be done properly, leaving the user still in full control and with easy direct access to the "internals" to achieve such control. Shortly afterwards, PostScript emerged and supplanted the Optical Daisywheel (aka CAT Phototypesetter), and extended that control beyond the computer to the output itself. We liked the way we worked then, and we like it still; and the emergence of Linux has maintained that distinctive way of working and made it available to a much larger userbase. And I think we have been able, to this day, to feel happy about the better performance and capabilities of this way of working. But, in my view again, somewhat unfortunately Linux has increasingly yielded to the gravitational pull of the Windows world. Increasingly, with the adoption of Office-type software suites, the user's output is encapsulated in an impenetrable format, and the control the user has over this is becoming increasingly remote. I fear that the above move from PS towards PDF may bring similar disadvatages with it. Unless, of course, we can gain the same control over PDF as we have over PS (see above). Just my thoughts ... Best wishes to all, Ted. -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 21-Apr-06 Time: 10:33:56 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Groff mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
