In article <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
says...
>
<snip>
 
Stan,
 
>
>As one who has spent far too much time fiddling with a document's
>appearance instead of writing more text,  I submit that in general, you're
>better off spending time adding content instead of controlling appearance
>...and PDF seems to encourages you to do the latter.
>
This is actually  the same argument the HTML 1.0 ratifaction
team gave, i.e. it's the content not the apperance.  I maintained
then and do now, sure people will waste a lot of time trying to
impress instead of trying to convey, but this stuff *is* going
to be big.  So just as you would not ask Time or News Week to
stick to 2 or 3 fonts and 7 or 8 point sizes you can not ask
the web to do the same thing.
 
Stan is right about the inherent waste in PDF.  Adobe was not
right about it or PostScript.  CERN is reconsidering implementing
the full SMGL spec., but it may be to late with all the plugin
artists and Netscape Com's own leading the cart approach.  Whatever,
happened to open standards.  Jeeezzz
 
jerry
 
 
--
Former Hughes Aircraft employee, NOW  \\|//  an Outsourcee 4 CSC
+-----------------------+My opinions  |O-O|  are JUST THAT !!!
| Jerry Bostick         +----------oOO-(_)-OOo-----------------+
| Computer Systems Engineer Specialist, Senior                 |
| Computer Sciences Corp.  work fax.:   619 573-3161           |
| 5021 Kearny Mesa Rd.   home-e-mail: [log in to unmask]       |
| San Diego, Ca. 92123   work-e-mail: [log in to unmask] |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+