OK - not because they are binary as such. I do have an analogue computer, by the way, between my ears, and it crashes from time to time ... :) The essential point is openness. The .pdf format is open and published, and there's nothing illegal about others publishing software which creates .pdf files. Standards are good, open standards are better. MS Word is a de-facto standard, and people who use it as a means of document exchange find it convenient that plenty of others have it. But it's not actually very good for this purpose because of version changes and because of macro viruses. And because it's not open. However: going back to the binary issue, in general formats which are text are better than formats which are binary. e.g TeX/LaTeX, .ps, magicpoint for presentations (try it) etc ... On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, adrian.wells wrote:
But the point is not whether we can read the things if we have to, it's whether they are a sensible format for document exchange. And they're not, both because they are a proprietary format and because they are binary.
Because they are binary? Do you have an analog computer Roger?
Actually the point IS whether we can read it, a bit pointless otherwise, and this in turn is controlled by which software the majority of people have on their desktops and as much as you and I hate it, uncle Bill wins hands down.
As to PDF, is this not owned by Adobe? (I may be wrong here so bare with me) If so, are non adobe versions of PDF compilers not illegal? That's why the readers are free, to encourage compilers to be paid for by people who wish to disseminate documents to any user (they know that the end use can download the reader if they do not have it), otherwise one is shooting one's own foot (as a software house).
Kind regards Adrian Wells.
-- Roger Whittaker SuSE Linux Ltd The Kinetic Centre Theobald Street Borehamwood Herts WD6 4PJ ---------------------- 020 8387 1482 ---------------------- roger@suse-linux.co.uk ----------------------