[WEB4LIB] Re: WAS Accessibility annoyance ... NEW: PDF/Adobe FormServer

[Kevin Bishop]

What am I missing?  PDF seems to fit the open standard definition you
cite below.  To quote Principles 1-3 of that definition: 

+++
1. Availability
Open Standards are available for all to read and implement. 

2.Maximize End-User Choice
Open Standards create a fair, competitive market for implementations of
the standard. They do not lock the customer in to a particular vendor or
group. 

3. No Royalty
Open Standards are free for all to implement, with no royalty or fee.
Certification of compliance by the standards organization may involve a
fee. 
+++

An Acrobat/PDF FAQ (of sorts) from PDFZone.com, a web site that appears
to be an important resource for the "PDF community of developers":
http://www.pdfzone.com/resources/aboutacrobat.html
Excerpt: "Developers can create their own software to read, create, or
modify PDF files without special permission or licensing." The headlines
in their news and front pages feature many non-Adobe companies and
organizations. 

Btw, many in the web development community would refer to the
Recommendations proposed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) as "'de
facto' web standards" as well.  

-kb
_________________________________
Kevin W. Bishop > bishopk at rpi.edu
Communication & Collaboration Technologies
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
   RPInfo: http://www.rpi.edu/rpinfo/
   Kiosk:  http://j2ee.rpi.edu:8080/kiosk/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: web4lib at webjunction.org
> [mailto:web4lib at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Raymond Wood
> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:24 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [WEB4LIB] Re: WAS Accessibility annoyance ... NEW: 
> PDF/Adobe FormServer
> 
> 
> Raymond:
> > > Perhaps to a degree:  PDF is at least cross-platform.  On the 
> > > other hand it is still a proprietary format that requires 
> > > expensive software just to do anything more than read it.  I 
> > > thought this was the whole point of HTML -- an open standard that 
> > > facilitated the sharing of textual and multimedia
> information  ;)
> 
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 10:15:25AM -0800, Kevin Bishop remarked:
> > It's my understanding that PDF is an open standard, not exactly
> > proprietary.
> 
> Define "open standard"  :)  PDF is no open standard...
> 
> To some, an open standard might be defined as a "fully
> documented" format, in which case this might apply to PDF.
> 
> However the bottom line is that the PDF format is still
> owned/controlled by Adobe.  They can change the rules of the 
> game at any point they may choose, and others do not have the 
> same rights, or opportunities for input.  I certainly do not 
> consider this a true "open standard".  Even Adobe themselves 
> refer to PDF as a "open *de facto* standard" (emphasis mine).
> 
> For a decent definition of what is, and is not, an "open
> standard" see:
>   http://perens.com/OpenStandards/Definition.html
> 
> > PDFs can be produced without Adobe software. 
> > http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/adobepdf.html
> > http://www.masternewmedia.com/issue16/pdfwithoutacrobat.htm
> 
> The applications listed on the URL above seem to work mainly
> by converting from format 'x' to PDF, rather than allowing 
> direct editing of PDF documents.  I'm not sure whether Adobe 
> software uses the same strategy in the production of PDF 
> documents or not.
> 
> Cheers,
> Raymond
> 
> 
>