[linux-elitists] What's wrong with PDF
Tue Nov 11 03:37:54 PST 2003
Quoting Bill Bogstad (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> When citing previous cases, you have to give precise location
> information which is often dependent on the rendering of the text as
> published by commercial enterprises which have cornered the market for
> the business of publishing said decisions for use by other lawyers.
This doesn't sound like the way I see cites in cases.
> Some investigation on my part indicates that this is starting to
> change, but precise volume and page information could still be
> critical to members of the legal profession.
Quite possibly for some materials -- but those would not typically be
available in verbatim electronic form anyway. (I cannot tell whether
extremely high-priced legal online search services do otherwise.)
In any event, can we please stop participating in that person Mr.
Still's effort to waste our time? I already said, as was perfectly
evident, that any time you need a document exactly the way it was on
paper originally with not the slightest pixel of deviation, then PDF
is a logical if regrettable choice -- one that sucks rocks as a document
format. Most of what followed have been efforts to ignore that basic
point, raised concerning the original sole format of the FHS 2.3 draft,
and try to argue sideways around it.
Rick Moen Linux for Intel: Party like it's 2037!
More information about the linux-elitists