Re: [gentoo-user] [ot] PDF or PS format for daily use?

[Hans-Werner Hilse <hilse@web.de>]

Hi,

Sorry for another tree of answers, but the others seemed a bit "fuzzy"
to me...

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 16:08:50 +0800 (CST)
Zhang Weiwu <zhangweiwu@realss.com> wrote:

> Because I always save two copies of every of my document, one in original
> format (eg. odt) and another in printable format for my colleagues in case
> they don't have the Linux fonts and software. Here comes the question should
> I keep a PS copy or PDF copy.

Note that PS is an interpreted language. PDF is a pure document format,
no "program flow" involved there.

You can do pretty funny things using Postscript you won't ever be able
to do with PDF. I think Postscript even has a Random Generator.

So if you do serious Postscript programming, PDF isn't an option ;-)

PDF can be thought as the final result of a computation, Postscript
describes the computation itself.
 
> I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because:
> * easier to find acrobat reader;

Hm. Let's turn this into: On most computers you'll find a PDF reader today.

> * can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo;

Hm, produced by OOo, but "used"?!? Can be something to think of when it
comes to reading on PDAs.

> * possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost;

Not impossible with Postscript - doesn't have Gnome's new doc viewer
have such a feature? Or something on KDE? Not sure, though...

> * not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension;

But you still have the PDF version that _may_ prevent you from opening
the PDFs on older Acrobat Readers when chosing a too high level.

> * different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told
> "can be taken to press house"

No difference to postscript here - besides the new layers feature

> * easy to convert to PS format when needed.

This is true the other way, too.

> Here comes the question: if the above all stands true, why do I ever need PS
> format at all? There might be some reasons to keep this format still
> existing. Perhaps in other areas, other then office work.

Because that's what your printer interpretes? Or its network server thingy?

> So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format.

Except for piping it to the printer, yes.

> Now welcome for suggestions.

PDF is fine. Hm, and if you want something very future-proof, keep a
plain text copy. This isn't a joke, let's discuss this in 30 years or
so...

> P.S. another quesiton I happen wish to have an answer: in one case, I have
> to keep PS format because, I can print booklet (brochure) in OOO2 right the
> way I expected, but if I carry this brochure to my colleague, and he doesn't
> have openoffice, then I try to export to PDF format, and found there is no
> 'brochure' option in exporting,[.....

emerge pdftk && read about it on http://www.accesspdf.com, or check out
the Multivalent Tools (google will tell you the address).

> .......] also there is no 'brochure' option in
> Acrobat Reader printing dialogue box, so it's clear if I export to PDF
> format I will never be able to print it in brochure style on a normal PC, so
> I have to print to PS file and carry it. But so far this is the only case I
> think I need PS format. If I only exported PDF format, can I still print a
> brochure? The difficulty in printing brochure is you have to make correct
> page order.

Of course. You can create a new PDF with above mentioned tools that has
pages from the other PDF layouted in a certain way in the new PDF.

-hwh

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list