Re: In Defense of PDFs

["Huber, Mike" <mrhuber -at- SOFTWARE -dot- ROCKWELL -dot- COM>]

<practical aside>

If this were a real task, rather than a grail/football in a holy war,
I'm sure many of us would put most of the document in HTML and include a
link to a PDF (or other add-in) version of the graphic.

Or some of us might use the autocad file directly, and include a link
for an autocad drawing viewer that the user can download.

</practical aside>

>-----Original Message-----
>From:  David Knopf [SMTP:david -at- KNOPF -dot- COM]
>Sent:  Friday, March 06, 1998 12:19 PM
>To:    TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>Subject:       Re: In Defense of PDFs
>
>At 10:45 AM 3/6/98 -0600, Wing, Michael J wrote:
>>>
>>> One thing I really like about PDF images is that they are scalable.  You =
>>> can zoom in and really see the details - even on a laptop.  It is a =
>>> great way to put B-sized schematics on line.  I can't imagine how I'd do =
>>> that with HTML or anything else for that matter.
>...
>>>
>>Ok, here's how.  The following increases the size of the schematic GIF by a
>>factor of 1.5 every time it (the image) is clicked.  It decreases the size
>>by a factor of 1.5 whenever the image is double-clicked.
>>...
>
>Yes, this would work ... once you've converted your autocad drawing or
>postscript image to an enormous highly detailed GIF (postscript to GIF is
>always a fun conversion) ... once you've ensured that all of your users are
>running a current version of IE so that the VB script will work (too bad for
>Netscape users) ... and once you've compelled your users to endure a very
>long
>download to get the image onto their local system ... and once they've
>figured
>out the click/double-click semantic ...
>
>Of course you wouldn't have to worry about these issues with a PDF, but
>Mike's
>right, you could do it with an HTML file and a GIF image.