10 Oct
2002
10 Oct
'02
10:23 a.m.
I dunno, I prefer TIFFs, but they have the disadvantage of being honkin'
huge.. But at least I can go and in be anal-retentive and edit them to look
better than the originals, can't edit pdfs nearly as much...
Will J
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
10 Oct
10 Oct
11:01 a.m.
I think what I'll do is post both HTML and PDF. The OCR ability in Abbyy
FineReader is so good as to be spooky and since I verify and hand-correct
any errors that do show up, those two formats should be sufficient.
Expect CP/M 68K docs soon as well.
g.
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, Will Jennings wrote:
I dunno, I prefer TIFFs, but they have the
disadvantage of being honkin'
huge.. But at least I can go and in be anal-retentive and edit them to look
better than the originals, can't edit pdfs nearly as much...
Will J
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
11 Oct
11 Oct
5:04 p.m.
It all depends on wether you want the data to be still "mostly "there if
something goes wrong with the file.
AFAIK PDF and TIFF will be totally unusable with any one byte missing.
whereas HTML XML and other text based format will still have useable and
recognizable data.
Just my $0.02
Francois
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene Buckle" <geneb(a)deltasoft.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: A quandry....
I think what I'll do is post both HTML and PDF.
The OCR ability in Abbyy
FineReader is so good as to be spooky and since I verify and hand-correct
any errors that do show up, those two formats should be sufficient.
Expect CP/M 68K docs soon as well.
g.
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, Will Jennings wrote:
> I dunno, I prefer TIFFs, but they have the disadvantage of being honkin'
> huge.. But at least I can go and in be anal-retentive and edit them to
look
better than
the originals, can't edit pdfs nearly as much...
Will J
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
14 Oct
14 Oct
7:30 a.m.
On Friday, October 11, 2002, Sue & Francois wrote:
AFAIK PDF and TIFF will be totally unusable with any
one byte missing.
While that is probably true for certain bytes (e.g. metadata), I'm almost
sure that other bytes could be mangled with little effect in both PDF and
TIFF format. You might have a 'q' instead of an 'A' or a black pixel
instead
of a white pixel. HTML isn't as invulnerable as you think. Screw up a key
'<' character and your document is dead.
For most manuals, with diagrams and pictures, I vote for PDF. If the
document is completely textual, ASCII text may be a better choice.
TIFF is horrible; many programs I've tried don't handle multi-page TIFFs.
Either they display only the first page (Photoshop) or just blow chunks and
die. I've found that Paint Shop Pro does it right. Acrobat 5 will also
convert multi-page TIFFs to PDF for you.
I would have known for sure if my employer hadn't gone under last month. My
next big project there was to get grokky with the PDF format. It's a
monster; the spec is several inches thick.
--
Jeffrey Sharp
8:35 a.m.
New subject: A quandry.... (specs)
FWIW, TIFF is an open specification,
http://partners.adobe.com/asn/developer/PDFS/TN/TIFF6.pdf
and *is* programatically accessable, I did it several years ago.
I have few complaints about either TIFF or HTML, however, for
best results I would choose PDF, I have seen many spectacular
renditions made with it. Just found the spec
http://partners.adobe.com/asn/developer/acrosdk/docs/filefmtspecs/PDFReferen
ce.pdf
John A.
7947
days inactive
7951
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
allain＠panix.com -
fauradon＠frontiernet.net -
geneb＠deltasoft.com -
jss＠subatomix.com -
xds_sigma7＠hotmail.com