Subject: RE: Faux Pas -- web publication in proprietary formats at ietf.org

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 10:29:27 -0800

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 
> Behalf Of Anthony G. Atkielski

> Hallam-Baker, Phillip writes:
> 
> > The problems with HTML are almost entirely the result of 
> people trying 
> > to give the author control over the final format which is 
> none of the 
> > author's beeswax.
> 
> It has been the author's prerogative for thousands of years; 
> I'm not sure why that must change now.  The author is the 
> creator of the content, not the reader.

It has been the publisher's perogative, not the authors.

The past ten years represent the anomaly in this regard, not the norm.
Until desktop publishing came along typography was the exclusive
preserve of typesetters, most of whom were trained in the craft.

If you compare LaTeX to more recent document processing mechanisms you
can see how Knuth and Lampson very deliberately set out to automate the
existing typesetting process and styles, not replace them with ad-hoc
DIY jobs.

When we were developing the Web and HTML the typical user had a
character cell based terminal on their desk, high definition displays
were comparatively rare, most were monochrome or limited color pallete.
So the tactic of the author deciding the final presentation was a
non-starter.

But even then we were anticipating the arrival of handheld cell phone
terminals, very large displays and the needs of the disabled. It was
clear that even if VGA became the dominant standard it would not last
very long. 

> > I also agree about the PDF font problem. I do have problems 
> printing 
> > pdf documents from time to time and every two weeks acrobat asks to 
> > upgrade itself, then if I forget and click yes thinks for a while 
> > before concluding that it can't upgrade my copy which is the paid 
> > version, not the free one.
> 
> If the fonts are properly embedded, they are not a problem.

And how pray is the user at either end meant to ensure that is the case?

How do I ensure that my Adobe document creation software will be
compatible with the reader's Adobe document reading software?

Answer: I should never need to bother.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 04:02:06 +0100

> It has been the publisher's perogative, not the authors.

They have usually worked together.

Today, the author may do all the work, in which case he has complete
control.

> The past ten years represent the anomaly in this regard,

More correctly, they represent a new norm.

> If you compare LaTeX to more recent document processing mechanisms
> you can see how Knuth and Lampson very deliberately set out to
> automate the existing typesetting process and styles, not replace
> them with ad-hoc DIY jobs.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say with this.

> So the tactic of the author deciding the final presentation was a

In that case, plain text will do.

> And how pray is the user at either end meant to ensure that

It's a simple option in most programs that generate PDF.  I use
embedded subsets in all my PDF documents, and there's never a problem
with fonts, because they are in the documents.

> compatible with the reader's Adobe document reading software?

It's not a question of compatibility, it's a question of setting the
right option.  In other words, it's just a matter of reading the
manual.

> Answer: I should never need to bother.

If you're deciding the format of your document, you need to bother,
just like the typesetters who came before you.