Re. HTML vs. Acrobat

Subject: Re. HTML vs. Acrobat
From: geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 14:30:45 -0600

My take on the choice between HTML and Acrobat? Acrobat is
the way to go if the visual structure of the information
must be identical for all readers, no matter what computer
they use (i.e., if the form is as important as the
content). HTML is the way to go if the information is more
important than (and independent of) its visual structure.
Those statements are a bit more black and white than I
prefer, but they do cut to the heart of the matter.

One other note: Until they revise applications (e.g,
PageMaker) to incorporate hyperlinks that will be preserved
when you produce the Acrobat version of the document,
Acrobat is unacceptable for online work that will change
regularly. Too much hassle to constantly have to recreate
the hyperlinks in Acrobat itself. (Caveat: I haven't
updated my version of Acrobat for more than a year... have
they fixed this gaping hole yet? I know they've at least
_tried_ to patch it in PageMaker 6, albeit unsuccessfully
so far.)

--Geoff Hart @8^{)}
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca

Disclaimer: If I didn't commit it in print in one of our
reports, it don't represent FERIC's opinion.

Previous by Author: Establishing a documentation process
Next by Author: Re. Interface metaphor hype?
Previous by Thread: Looking for Judges
Next by Thread: Re: Re. HTML vs. Acrobat

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

Sponsored Ads