W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2001

RE: HTML vs. PDF

From: William F. Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 16:05:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200108242005.f7OK5eR25688@pluto.math.albany.edu>
To: www-html@w3.org
Jeff Carr <Jeff.Carr@lrn.va.gov> writes in reply to
Elliott Staffin <StaffinE@SEC.GOV> in the discussion "www-html@w3.org":

> Since html is a plain text file, searching is very easy, and can be done in
> basically any language or method that you might care to try.  Also, query's
> can be built using the DOM/HTML and/or XPath/XHTML.  Using XHTML, the
> [ . . . ]
> > Is it still true that HTML offers greater search capabilities within a
> > document or between documents than PDF?  Thanks, Elliot Staffin
> > staffine@www.sec.gov or Elliotstffn@aol.com

And crawlers are not very likely to catalog pdf.

Accessibility is another issue in this regard.

Even more to the point: if content is created in an *authoring* level
SGML or XML markup, it can then be formatted to produce parallel
XHTML and PDF versions.  In fact, beyond that one can have two
different PDF versions.  So in all one can have from one source:

   a.   XHTML for optimal access and electronic analysis.

   b.   Landscape formatting suitable for free web screen viewing.

   c.   Portrait formatting suitable for printing (and, if desired,
        sales).

                                    -- Bill
Received on Friday, 24 August 2001 16:05:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:49 GMT