RE: PDF vs HTML

[Mike Tatro <tatro@xxxxxxx>]

Careful Cas. Those sorts of opinions don't seem very welcome here.

I chose not to respond to Dan's post because what *can* one really say to
someone who posits a "<fill_in_the_blank> uber alles" argument (i.e., paper
manuals are ALWAYS superior to online help).

I continue to be a part of the list because hardcopy manuals produced with
FM are a fact of life for me. I'd be hard-pressed to think of a more
knowledgeable group of folks on that particular topic. Dan is obviously one
of the most knowledgeable guys I've ever encountered and I respect his
opinions for what they are - his opinions. God knows, I have plenty of my
own.

What I do think some folks miss about HTML is that the behavior Dan most
criticizes is actually a feature. The fact that each person can potentially
define a different default screen font is a feature, not a limitation. The
underlying philosophy is that I (the user) know better what my default
screen font should be than some author in an ivory tower. What about those
nearly blind (who may need a large font) or running very small displays (who
may need a small font)? Should they be tied to someone else's idea of the
"best" screen font?

HTML also scales in many other ways (e.g., tables automatically size to the
display, text auto flows around graphics), all of which are intended to
display differently on different systems. However, to leverage this
behavior, one *must* consider those things when authoring. 

Of course embracing this new paradigm means yielding absolute control over
the page layout in order to *better* serve one's readers. Many "old school"
writer/publishers are loathe to do this. Hence, the bad feelings about HTML
in general and the specific criticism that it never looks the way they
intended it to. 

I do agree with Dan wholeheartedly that "shovelware" is the last refuge of a
hack. 

Warmest Regards,
Michael L. Tatro
Documentation Manager
V-Systems, Inc.
tatro@vsi.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cas Tuyn [mailto:Cas.Tuyn@asml.nl]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 1:53 AM
> To: SMoore@iti.com; FrameSGML@onelist.com; framers@omsys.com;
> danemory@primenet.com
> Subject: Re: PDF vs HTML
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> My EUR 0.02 regarding Dan's mail (clipped slightly):
> 
> > What Utter Nonsense!
> > 1. Experimental results have established that .....
> > 2. Experimental results show that .....
> > 3. ..... people understand more when the
> > screen looks like a well-designed printed book.
> > 4. Real-world experience ..... Most people who browse through 
> > long HTML documents adopt the print-before-reading habit
> 
> IF 
>    you see online publishing as onscreen viewing of information
>    layed out such that it requires an A4 monitor with a 600 dpi 
>    resolution, 
> AND 
>    you do not have that monitor,
> THEN
>    everything Dan said makes perfect sense.
> 
> OTOH, when you take the limitations of your reader and his/her
> screen and environment into consideration when you design the 
> new layout, HTML may approach the readability of the paper 
> publication. 
> 
> In industry/business environments with 800x600 screen laptops 
> and paperless environments the typical multicolumn, side-headed 
> A4 PDF (with print resolution graphics) is a scrolling exercise, 
> and a memory/diskspace hog too. Furthermore, when you change a 
> few words in a PDF file, the whole file needs to be replaced, 
> while HTML is normally split in many small files, so you only 
> have to ship a small file.
> 
> Some realworld experience: since 1994 I used FrameViewer to 
> publish our 3000 FM files and 5000 illustrations, arranged in 
> small files per Frame's documentation recommendations (see 
> Chapter 18, Planning online systems). 
> Last year I had the choice between PDF and HTML. I chose to
> create the navigation in PERL, which accesses a plaintext 
> database with all files, and when you click on a link, you 
> get a WWP prepared HTML file. 
> 
> To avoid an output format battle, BOTH formats may produce 
> acceptable results, when designed with the end user in mind.
> I thought HTML was a bit underexposed in this particular thread,
> but I use it as well in addition to HTML, when people want to
> print the documentation remotely.
> 
> 
> 	Kind regards,
> 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Cas Tuyn                                             cas.tuyn@asml.nl
> Publications department	                        tel: 
> (+31) 40 2303723
> ASM Lithography	                                fax: 
> (+31) 40 2303883
> De Run 1110                                     mail:    P.O. Box 324
> 5503 LA  Veldhoven                                 5500 AH  Veldhoven
> The Netherlands                                       The Netherlands
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
> ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **
> 

** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **