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

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

[Zhang Weiwu]

Hello. I have got a lot (much more) ps files and PDF files since I start to
use Linux. In the past there were mostly doc files but now I always prefer
to have a PS or PDF copy to ease the compatibility pain. And looks linux
people always prefer to send me a PS or PDF document.

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.

I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because:
* easier to find acrobat reader;
* can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo;
* possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost;
* not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension;
* different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told
"can be taken to press house"
* easy to convert to PS format when needed.

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.

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

Now welcome for suggestions.

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, 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.

--
Zhang Weiwu   CEO Real Softservice
International business: http://www.realss.com
International sales:    0086 10 84606011
Inland business:        http://www.realss.cn
Inland sales call:      0086 592 2099987
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Daniel da Veiga]

On 10/23/05, Zhang Weiwu <zhangweiwu@realss.com> wrote:
> Hello. I have got a lot (much more) ps files and PDF files since I start to
> use Linux. In the past there were mostly doc files but now I always prefer
> to have a PS or PDF copy to ease the compatibility pain. And looks linux
> people always prefer to send me a PS or PDF document.
>
> 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.
>
> I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because:
> * easier to find acrobat reader;
> * can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo;
> * possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost;
> * not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension;
> * different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told
> "can be taken to press house"
> * easy to convert to PS format when needed.
>
> 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.
>
> So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format.
>
> Now welcome for suggestions.
>
> 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, 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.
>
> --
> Zhang Weiwu   CEO Real Softservice
> International business: http://www.realss.com
> International sales:    0086 10 84606011
> Inland business:        http://www.realss.cn
> Inland sales call:      0086 592 2099987
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/why-not-pdf.html

Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps,
added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with
lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself.

--
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[John Jolet]

On Monday 24 October 2005 08:33, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
Um, ps is itself proprietary.  Technically, adobe still owns the patent, don't 
they?
> Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps,
> added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with
> lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself.
>
> --
> Daniel da Veiga
> Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
> PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-- 
John Jolet
Your On-Demand IT Department
512-762-0729
www.jolet.net
john@jolet.net
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Daniel da Veiga]

On 10/24/05, John Jolet <john@jolet.net> wrote:
> On Monday 24 October 2005 08:33, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
> Um, ps is itself proprietary.  Technically, adobe still owns the patent, don't
> they?

Yeah, my mistake. Still, postscript was always more portable than pdf (IMO).

> > Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps,
> > added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with
> > lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself.
> >
> > --
> > Daniel da Veiga
> > Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
> > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> > Version: 3.1
> > GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
> > PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
> > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
> --
> John Jolet
> Your On-Demand IT Department
> 512-762-0729
> www.jolet.net
> john@jolet.net
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[John Jolet]

On Monday 24 October 2005 09:22, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
> On 10/24/05, John Jolet <john@jolet.net> wrote:
> > On Monday 24 October 2005 08:33, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
> > Um, ps is itself proprietary.  Technically, adobe still owns the patent,
> > don't they?
>
> Yeah, my mistake. Still, postscript was always more portable than pdf
> (IMO).
I agree, until you try to send it to a windows user.  
>
> > > Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps,
> > > added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with
> > > lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Daniel da Veiga
> > > Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
> > > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> > > Version: 3.1
> > > GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
> > > PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
> > > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
> >
> > --
> > John Jolet
> > Your On-Demand IT Department
> > 512-762-0729
> > www.jolet.net
> > john@jolet.net
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
> --
> Daniel da Veiga
> Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
> PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-- 
John Jolet
Your On-Demand IT Department
512-762-0729
www.jolet.net
john@jolet.net
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Digby Tarvin]

In general, I think it is pretty straight forward to go from PDF
to postscript, and PDF seems easier to access for Windows users,
so if you can store a PDF file as your displayable format then
I don't think you need to also store the postscipt.

There are occasions, however, when PDF output isn't an option
and so postcript is necessary. For example, I have yet
to find a way to get TeX ducuments which include TeXdraw diagrams
into PDF without losing all the graphics. 

Does anyone know if gs or something similar is available for
windows? 

Regards,
DigbyT

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 12:22:04PM -0200, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
> On 10/24/05, John Jolet <john@jolet.net> wrote:
> > On Monday 24 October 2005 08:33, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
> > Um, ps is itself proprietary.  Technically, adobe still owns the patent, don't
> > they?
> 
> Yeah, my mistake. Still, postscript was always more portable than pdf (IMO).
> 
> > > Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps,
> > > added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with
> > > lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself.
> > >
-- 
Digby R. S. Tarvin                                             digbyt@digbyt.com
http://www.digbyt.com
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[David Helstroom]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 223 bytes --]

Digby Tarvin wrote:

><snip>
>Does anyone know if gs or something similar is available for
>windows?
>  
>
You could try googling for "gs windows". Check out:
    http://www.google.com/search?q=gs+windows

HTH,


    Dave.

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3465 bytes --]

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

[Matthias Bethke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 874 bytes --]

Hi Daniel,
on Monday, 2005-10-24 at 11:33:47, you wrote:
> Take a look at this... PDF is the proprietary modification of ps,
> added some tags and some compression (that can easily be repeated with
> lots of advantages in any compressor). And, well, read for yourself.

This is obviously a few years old; the guy still has a point about
ergonomics but I don't have any problems with PDF files on Linux today.
The huge advantage PDF has over PS that it's searchable and accomodates
bitmap graphics with decent compression. Put a 300dpi A5-size JPEG into
a TeX document and run it through pdfTeX---and then convert it to PS...
For something that prints nicely and is still accessible, there is just
no usable alternative.

regards
	Matthias

-- 
I prefer encrypted and signed messages. KeyID: 90CF8389
Fingerprint: 8E1F 1081 A466 2946  B98A B9E2 099F 3B91

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 481 bytes --]

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

[Chris Gottbrath]

I am not 100% sure but I seem to recall someone telling me that pdfs 
embed any fonts that are used, whereas ps files expect the fonts in 
question to be on the machine that you look at the ps file with. This 
could be a strong argument in favor of pdf files if you are sending the 
files to others.

Does anyone know if that is correct or if I am remembering wrong?

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

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Nick Rout]

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:58:10 -0500
Chris Gottbrath wrote:

> I am not 100% sure but I seem to recall someone telling me that pdfs 
> embed any fonts that are used, whereas ps files expect the fonts in 
> question to be on the machine that you look at the ps file with. This 
> could be a strong argument in favor of pdf files if you are sending the 
> files to others.
> 
> Does anyone know if that is correct or if I am remembering wrong?

Certainly it is possible to embed all the fonts in a pdf, and this is
often a good idea. It's not always the default though. How you do it
will probably depend which tool/library you are using to produce the
.pdf.

I am not sure if font embedding is possible in a .ps document.


-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:10:56 +1300
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz> wrote:

> I am not sure if font embedding is possible in a .ps document.

Of course it is. I think people using laser printers would have
complained a lot otherwise...

-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Nick Rout]

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:57:31 +0200
Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:10:56 +1300
> Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz> wrote:
> 
> > I am not sure if font embedding is possible in a .ps document.
> 
> Of course it is. I think people using laser printers would have
> complained a lot otherwise...
> 
> -hwh

yes true, well that dismisses Chris' theory :)

> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

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

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

[Antoine]

Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> Hello. I have got a lot (much more) ps files and PDF files since I start to
> use Linux. In the past there were mostly doc files but now I always prefer
> to have a PS or PDF copy to ease the compatibility pain. And looks linux
> people always prefer to send me a PS or PDF document.
> 
> 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.
> 
> I think PDF copy is absolutely the prefered format because:
> * easier to find acrobat reader;
> * can be 'Tagged', especially used with OOo;
> * possibility to 'copy and paste', though format will be lost;
> * not to take other people by surprise with unfamiliar PS extension;
> * different quanlity: I can save PDF in very high quanlity that I was told
> "can be taken to press house"
> * easy to convert to PS format when needed.
> 
> 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.
> 
> So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format.
> 
> Now welcome for suggestions.

I think the key to this whole story is the second to last line above. 
"for typical office workers" says it all. I think you are quite right to 
say you can forget PS format. You could probably stick with pdf if you 
only need the documents for 2-5 years. PDF is very much industry 
standard for archiving, and isn't going away soon.
I would *definitely* think about keeping documents (if you are going to 
go to the trouble of archiving and all that) in text format, probably 
xml like odt or even m$ xml, because if the data are valuable then 
finding something to read it in 50 years will probably be difficult. The 
EU is looking like it will go that way just like Massachusetts - no 
reason why you shouldn't either. You will ALWAYS be able to find or 
create a tool to get decently printed and onscreen presentation from 
well marked up plaintext.
Cheers
Antoine
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Nick Rout]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:04:13 +0200
Antoine wrote:


> > So the conclusion: for typical office workers, we can forget PS format.
> > 
> > Now welcome for suggestions.
> 
> I think the key to this whole story is the second to last line above. 
> "for typical office workers" says it all. I think you are quite right to 
> say you can forget PS format. You could probably stick with pdf if you 
> only need the documents for 2-5 years. PDF is very much industry 
> standard for archiving, and isn't going away soon.
> I would *definitely* think about keeping documents (if you are going to 
> go to the trouble of archiving and all that) in text format, probably 
> xml like odt or even m$ xml, because if the data are valuable then 
> finding something to read it in 50 years will probably be difficult. The 
> EU is looking like it will go that way just like Massachusetts - no 
> reason why you shouldn't either. You will ALWAYS be able to find or 
> create a tool to get decently printed and onscreen presentation from 
> well marked up plaintext.

Don't forget that some documents that a "typical office worker" wants to archive may not be available as text. They may be scanned or fax
documents.

Our scanner /printer at the office outputs in .pdf or .tiff. I could
build a fax server to receive documents and save them in .tiff or pdf.

Suddenly it makes sense to save a whiole lot of stuff as pdf.

As you say, it isn't going away soon!


Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list