4 ms·
Admittedly, this is a sideshow: The typesetting quality of this document considerably lowered my confidence in its technical quality. It is appalling. More than
by lindig 11y ago
Admittedly, this is a sideshow: The typesetting quality of this document considerably lowered my confidence in its technical quality. It is appalling. More than 40 years after troff and more than 30 years after TeX were invented, computer science as a discipline should be able to do better.
Addendum: I don't want to imply that Troff and TeX are not adequate. Quite to the contrary. This PDF from Word is so bad that it doesn't match a quality that we surpassed decades ago. And even while using Word, the typesetting could be much better.
- dmm 11y agoIt's a word document exported as pdf: $ pdfinfo n1961.pdf Author: Michael Wong Creator: Acrobat PDFMaker 9.0 for Word Producer: Adobe PDF Library 9.0 CreationDate: Mon Sep 28 05:04:06 2015 ModDate: Mon Sep 28 05:04:23 2015 Tagged: yes UserProperties: no Suspects: no Form: none JavaScript: no Pages: 9 Encrypted: no Page size: 612 x 816.96 pts Page rot: 0 File size: 198701 bytes Optimized: yes PDF version: 1.5
- ben_bai 11y agoThe good old days... where text documents where ".txt" I've seen pure text mails of mine getting copied into ".ppt" with horrible formatting an then getting send around by e-mail. And I just had some plain text-only questions nothing anybody would ever present.
- jhallenworld 11y agoI'm not that worried about it. I mean why is this not acceptable, but RFCs are acceptable? I remember there was a computer architecture journal (ACM SIGARCH?) which had articles which were photocopies of dot-matrix printouts.