Re[3]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)

Subject: Re[3]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)
From: Rick Sapir <rick_sapir -at- GILBARCO -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:01:16 -0800

This is a Mime message, which your current mail reader
may not understand. Parts of the message will appear as
text. To process the remainder, you will need to use a Mime
compatible mail reader. Contact your vendor for details.

--IMA.Boundary.064941628
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="RFC822 message headers"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part


_______________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re[2]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)
From: Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- jci -dot- com at ~GATEWAY
Date: 3/6/96 7:24 AM

Received: from mark.gilbarco.com by grotto.mux.eng.gilbarco.com with SMTP
(IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 13dcd640; Wed, 6 Mar 96 09:37:40 -0800
Received: from bubba.ucc.okstate.edu by mark.gilbarco.com with SMTP id AA05340
(InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for <RICK_SAPIR -at- gilbarco -dot- com>);
Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:38:08 -0500
Received: from listserv.okstate.edu by bubba.ucc.okstate.edu id aa27829;
6 Mar 96 7:47 CST
Received: from LISTSERV.OKSTATE.EDU by LISTSERV.OKSTATE.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
release 1.8b) with spool id 23372 for TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU;
Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:47:21 -0600
Received: from mhub.corp.jci.com by interlock.jci.com with SMTP id AA21691
(InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for <TECHWR-L -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu>);
Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:46:36 -0600
Received: from core.corp.jci.com by mhub.corp.jci.com; Wed, 6 Mar 96 07:51:45
-0500
Received: from ccMail.JCI.Com by CORE.Corp.JCI.Com (PMDF V4.3-13 #3982) id
<01I20EFS5D0W00135H -at- CORE -dot- Corp -dot- JCI -dot- Com>; Wed, 06 Mar 1996 07:48:35
-0600 (CST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-Id: <01I20EFVDDCM00135H -at- CORE -dot- Corp -dot- JCI -dot- Com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:24:00 -0600
Reply-To: Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- jci -dot- com
Sender: "Technical Writers List; for all Technical Communication issues" <
TECHWR-
L -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu>
From: Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- jci -dot- com
Subject: Re[2]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)
To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L <TECHWR-L -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu>

--IMA.Boundary.064941628
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part


>________________________________________________________________
>Subject: Re[2]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)
>From: Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- jci -dot- com at ~GATEWAY
>Date: 3/6/96 7:24 AM

> Acrobat is great for putting a carbon copy of an 8.5" by 11" page on
> a computer screen, but who wants to read _that_? I'm not saying you
> couldn't design a document for online distribution first, and then
> "compile" it with Acrobat. I'm sure you can. From experience though,
> people don't.

>You make a good point point; the best tool in the world is no good unless
>it is used prerly. Unfortunately, there are *no* documentation delivery
>systems in existence that cannot be misused or abused. None of them force
>the creator to use them properly.

Wait a sec. Are we talking about online _distribution_ (or "Electronic File
Transfer" as the original message thread was titled) or online viewing? I think
there is a vast difference. For distribution, Acrobat is the only way to ensure
that they document, when finally printed by the end-user, will look exactly the
way it was intended to look. This is very important for my documents, which
carry a lot of legal and safety issues.

[snip]

>Adobe is working on a way to read a PDF doc one page at a time over the
>net. I wonder if, after MS and Netscape stand panting over the torn and
>bleeding corpse of HTML, Adobe's method will be the *only* way of
>delivering documentation that gives you some reason to hope that what
>you've done ends up being something the user will find readable.


The "Amber" version of Acrobat (currently available in beta) allows you to do
exactly this. It will help eliminate all the "must use version X of XXXX to
properly render this web page" notices that seem to be on everyone's web
pages.


+---------------------------------------------------------+
Rick Sapir Gilbarco, Inc.
Technical Communicator Greensboro, NC
Rick_Sapir -at- gilbarco -dot- com
+---------------------------------------------------------+
DISCLAIMER: Speaking for no one but myself.

"Ideas withheld or repressed are automatically imbued - Jeff Heiskell
with a false sense of mystery and intrigue." The JudyBats
--IMA.Boundary.064941628--


Previous by Author: Re[3]: Electronic File Transfer
Next by Author: Need Help: Department Name Change
Previous by Thread: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)
Next by Thread: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads