TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I wasn't offended! I hope my jest (the scanning my monitor
to make pdf's, etc.) didn't offend you.
I was attempting to poke fun at all the hoops we sometimes have to
jump through to get our tools to do what we want, and the way folks
on the list seem to assume it's "normal" to have to work that hard
to get good results.
I was also (of course) tweaking the idea that anything we get from
our humble attempts at DP is likely to be of stellar quality.
Screen output will _never_ match the resolution of print, until
they create a monitor that displays hundreds of millions of pixels,
is completely non-reflective, and has a 100% non-luminous black.
For now, acceptable is all we can hope for.
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know my joke was... unaimed. Perhaps
not the best practice for jokes - or arrows? :)
Don't stop posting questions/complaints. I too appreciate the sense
of camaraderie I get from hearing other's problems on the list,
and the information offered by those with solutions to suggest.
And I'm also not satisfied with the screen quality of pdf's. :)
From: bounce-techwr-l-72045 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
[mailto:bounce-techwr-l-72045 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com]On Behalf Of Nealon,
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 5:25 PM
Subject: Fuzzy images
I seem to have offended a number of you with my comments about PDFs. I
apologize for stirring things up or making people angry. I had no idea my
comments would be controversial in the least. I thought fuzzy PDFs was
something we all agreed on. So much of this list is dedicated to
commiserating on the appearance of and conversion problems with PDFs that I
didn't think I was saying anything out of the ordinary.
My comments were not meant as a critique of anyone's work or suggestions.
That was so far from my mind, I didn't even realize that they could have
been taken that way until now. Instead, I was expressing the limitations of
a tool that we all use. One that my team struggled with for a long time.
Many people on this board agree that Word is limited for long documents
because it wasn't designed for them. We make it jump through hoops with a
lot of practice, but that doesn't change its basic nature. I was merely
pointing out a similar situation with Adobe PDFs.
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.