From baker@dad.cs.fsu.edu Tue Jul 22 16:16:25 1997 Received: from dad.cs.fsu.edu (dad.cs.fsu.edu [128.186.121.23]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA12736 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 1997 16:16:23 +0200 Received: by dad.cs.fsu.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA16435; Tue, 22 Jul 1997 10:15:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 10:15:22 -0400 Message-Id: <199707221415.KAA16435@dad.cs.fsu.edu> From: Ted Baker To: SC22WG15@dkuug.dk Subject: liaison from WG9 I received the following for comment via the WG9 mailing list. I might be of interest to WG15 also. --Ted Baker (WG9 Liaison) | Subject: PostScript versus PDF | From: moorej@mail04.mitre.org (James W. Moore, reply to moorej@acm.org) | To: follett@access.digex.net DRAFT -- Comments for improvement are invited. JWM | To: Bob Follett, Chair, SC22 | cc: Bill Rinehuls, Secretariat, SC22 | WG9 Email reflector | From: Jim Moore, Convener, SC22/WG9 | Subj: Postscript versus PDF As a part of JTC1's plan to convert to electronic document distribution, JTC1 has designated a list of acceptable file formats for document distribution. At the recent meeting of SC22/WG9, we discussed the list and generally approved with one exception. The purpose of this note is to discuss that one area of disagreement and to request the support of SC22 in seeking a change by JTC1. We request that the list be changed to remove PDF and add PostScript. Postscript and PDF are similar in many important ways: - - Both permit the distribution of documents in a non-revisable format. - - Both retain the integrity of pagination in the distributed form. - - Both can be readily viewed and printed on a wide variety of platforms via readers that are available for free. Postscript has two important advantages over PDF: - - Virtually all document or word processing systems are able to produce PostScript documents. One simply uses a PostScript printer driver with its output directed to a file rather than a device. Few systems, if any, support the direct production of PDF. Instead, the output document (ironically, often in Postscript form) must be converted to PDF by the use of a program which must be purchased. The price of the program is between $200 and $300 US. Apparently, those who prefer PDF make this preference because of a view that variabilities among PostScript versions hamper portability. Until recently, I believed this myself. I have now verified, though, the availablity and usability of two software programs, GhostScript and GhostView, that permit the easy handling of all varieties of PostScript documents on a wide variety of platforms, including Unix, MacIntosh, and PC (including Windows 3.1 and 95). The utilities permit one to view PostScript documents in paginated form and to print them -- even on non-PostScript printers. The utilities are available for free -- they are FREEWARE, not shareware -- and they have been successfully used by many different users in different environments. With the availability of these utilities, it would be inappropriate to force project editors to purchase special purpose tools at significant expense. (Even if there are residual differences among PostScript versions that cannot be handled by GhostView/GhostScript, we can solve the problem by requesting that documents be generated using the PostScript version appropriate for some widely cloned printer, such as the Hewlett-Packard LaserJet III. PostScript printer drivers for this machine are widely and freely available.) Regards, Jim Moore