- From: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 12:37:23 +0100
- To: Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>, "public-lod\@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com> writes > So until we start building interactive publications, > I see no reason to move away from the > wonders that Latex/PDF can accomplish. Because PDF is rubbish on the web. Because almost all of the software tools for data visualisation are being written in JS these days. Because PDF is hard to extract from. Because embedding metadata is easy in HTML. Because, we do not make interactive publications because the technology we are using is antiquated and does not let us, not because we do not want to. I've even have journals try to charge me extra for colour. And, besides, we are making interactive publications. The bioinformatics community do this all the time. Often with data, and downloadable VMs so you can rerun the analysis. >> Maybe. But, that's totally backwards, IMO. > > But why is it backwards? We have different formats serving different > purposes. Diversity is healthy. Simply because PDF is not in the Web > stack it doesn't make it Web-unfriendly. Yes, actually, it does. Phil
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2014 11:37:48 UTC