5 ms·

Why is Firefox spending all their money and goodwill on a piece of technology that should be done away with? PDF is a dork. It's an accessibility nightmare wit

Why is Firefox spending all their money and goodwill on a piece of technology that should be done away with? PDF is a dork. It's an accessibility nightmare with no obvious advantage over simple ordinary webpages. Somewhere in the comments below, it is mentioned that supporting PDFs is a non-trivial piece of technology. May be! Even steam engines have non-trivial technology under the hood.

beervirus 6y ago
There are lots of use cases for PDF where a web page is totally unsuitable.
- marvindanig 6y ago
  As someone working on formats, I disagree with your generalization. But let's get into specifics. List the things about PDF that you believe can't be done with web pages?
  - cptskippy 6y ago
    It's easy to dismiss things in their entirety and then require someone else to "prove you wrong". Why don't you prove you're right instead? Why don't you list all of things that PDFs can do that can also be done with web pages?
    - marvindanig 6y ago
      Sure, here's my list: everything + more. There's nothing a PDF can do that a webpage can't. In fact there are a hundred of things that a webpage can do, but a PDF can't. Including, form fields, input fields and seamless form submissions. Webpages can also do this: https://bubblin.io/cover/official-handbook-by-marvin-danig#frontmatter https://bubblin.io/cover/official-handbook-by-marvin-danig#f... Disclosure: It's my work.
      - cptskippy 6y ago
        Anyone can create a PDF form to capture data and signatures, email it to someone who can then fill it out offline, and then email it back. That's not something easily done with a webpage, and it's not something my mom can do. PDFs are easy to make and easy to work with. Web pages aren't. Your work is impressive, and why would anyone want that? Do you envision lawyers putting all their legal contracts into fancy flippy books?
        marvindanig 6y ago
        > Do you envision lawyers putting all their legal contracts into fancy flippy books? Someone will have to solve it for the lawyers in a not so 'fancy consumerish' way. Point is that it is possible to do that, and Firefox shouldn't be solving this problem using an ancient format and a layer of cruft in between.
        cptskippy 6y ago
        But we have PDF today and everyone is already using it. What does this bring to the table that's improved over PDF from a user's perspective? You can be a developer who enjoys the smell of your own farts all day long but that doesn't mean anyone else wants to smell them.
        marvindanig 6y ago
        Well, if you sit so close to someone's opinions or comments on the Internet, wouldn't you have to smell whatever whether you like it or not? ;-)
      - minerjoe 6y ago
        Wish I could look at your work but my browser doesn't support javascript. I wonder what it is about.
        marvindanig 6y ago
        Those books do work without javascript. Go troll someone else.
  - f1refly 6y ago
    Distributing a document with functioning kerning and embedded fonts that works offline
    - marvindanig 6y ago
      Serviceworkers+@font-faces+font-kerning property of CSS3. Done, next.
      - yzmtf2008 6y ago
        I think you missed the point of distributing. I’m never going to let you email me your serviceworkers because I can’t forward this document to anyone without relying on you hosting a server / not changing the content.
        marvindanig 6y ago
        Oh, I'm all in for email/attachment based distribution. Just not with Firefox sporting it on the web browser where you'd in all certainty require someone to host a server and for you to trust them that no changes have been made to the content. That was the entire point of my comment at the top.
  - edflsafoiewq 6y ago
    Going to a particular page and only having to render that one page. Large HTML documents are unwieldy.
    - beervirus 6y ago
      The modern web is slow for a lot of reasons, but none of them are about rendering lots of static html. Anyway just break things up into multiple pages if necessary.
- derefr 6y ago
  Yes, maybe generally; but let’s talk about the specific case here — filling of complex PDF forms. When a PDF that has interactive form fields, calculated auto-populated fields, fields that are enabled/disabled according to the inputs of other fields, etc. — the organization that created it (usually government or education) usually does that because they want you to fill it out using a PDF viewer; save it (which will persist the form inputs “into” the resulting PDF); and then submit the modified PDF file back to them. They want this, because they can use automated backend processes to extract the data from the PDF. They don’t want you to just print out the thing and fill it out. In fact, many such “fillable” PDFs start off in a state with many of their form-fields disabled and voided, such that printing them out in that state would result in a form you can’t really write on! So, at that point, why didn’t they just make the PDF a web page? They’ve essentially reinvented a web form, but with extra steps. The only benefit a client gets is the ability to edit and save the form offline (but that can be done in a browser, too, with local storage); and furthermore, the ability to treat the resulting filled form as a file, moving it around before you submit it. But the cases where you need that are very niche, compared to the cases where you can just direct employees to your Intranet portal.
  - cptskippy 6y ago
    The use case you're describing wasn't feasible until about 20 years after PDFs were introduced. Web Storage isn't that old, has only recently become widely deployed, and in a lot of cases is disabled for security concerns.
  - vonmoltke 6y ago
    > In fact, many such “fillable” PDFs start off in a state with many of their form-fields disabled and voided, such that printing them out in that state would result in a form you can’t really write on! I have never seen this. Do you have an example? Every use if fillable PDFs I have encountered is a use case where submitting a handwritten form is still an option. > The only benefit a client gets is the ability to edit and save the form offline (but that can be done in a browser, too, with local storage); and furthermore, the ability to treat the resulting filled form as a file, moving it around before you submit it. I have yet to see a web form that actually saves a readable, properly-formatted, self-contained, easy to access, fully-offline copy. > But the cases where you need that are very niche, compared to the cases where you can just direct employees to your Intranet portal. This is not a trivial need; most forms sent as fillable PDFs need to or should be retained for some period after submission. Also, I don't know what "employees" and "Intranet" has to do with anything. You are also missing the use case where a form legally requires a live signature from one or more parties and need to be printed, even if just to scan and return. I recently had to do this for some insurance paperwork.
rk06 6y ago
PDF is widely used and supported. And FWIW, edge does support it.
cptskippy 6y ago
> It's an accessibility nightmare with no obvious advantage over simple ordinary webpages. It is easy to criticize something when you don't look back at the historical context through which it emerged. It has plenty of advantages over HTML but they're easy to dismiss if you don't have a use case for them.
- inetknght 6y ago
  > It has plenty of advantages over HTML but they're easy to dismiss if you don't have a use case for them. Can you discuss some of the advantages? The only advantage that comes to mind is that Apple has built-in support for writing PDFs and that has a lot to do with Adobe rather than PDF being a better candidate.
  - toyg 6y ago
    PDF prints infinitely better than HTML, and it can be somewhat hardened against modification by average users. If you think MSOffice users would prefer to output HTML over PDF, you don't live in the same corporate world I inhabit.
  - tdhz77 6y ago
    I work for US Federal courts, I can assure you html isn’t sufficient over PDF’s for court cases. Evidence are filed in pdfs. Documents (PDFs) need to be a historical archive, and the ability to modify would damage the credibility of those documents.
    - marvindanig 6y ago
      Yeah, but does Firefox need to solve the use-case of a court system? Also, tangentially the solution to guarantee "tamperproof" archiving is in cryptography and that's not a feature of PDF.
      - yzmtf2008 6y ago
        No, Firefox doesn’t need to support the use case of a court system. That’s not what GP is saying. All we’re establishing here is that PDF is a useful format, and Firefox is supporting it. Also, cryptographic signatures do happen to be a feature of PDF.
toyg 6y ago
> Why is Firefox spending all their money and goodwill I doubt "all" their money goes towards the pdf-reader bit. And tbh, I'd say nobody will really lower their goodwill towards Mozilla because they add features that a lot of people actually need.

beervirus 6y ago

There are lots of use cases for PDF where a web page is totally unsuitable.

marvindanig 6y ago
As someone working on formats, I disagree with your generalization. But let's get into specifics. List the things about PDF that you believe can't be done with web pages?
- cptskippy 6y ago
  It's easy to dismiss things in their entirety and then require someone else to "prove you wrong". Why don't you prove you're right instead? Why don't you list all of things that PDFs can do that can also be done with web pages?
  - marvindanig 6y ago
    Sure, here's my list: everything + more. There's nothing a PDF can do that a webpage can't. In fact there are a hundred of things that a webpage can do, but a PDF can't. Including, form fields, input fields and seamless form submissions. Webpages can also do this: https://bubblin.io/cover/official-handbook-by-marvin-danig#frontmatter https://bubblin.io/cover/official-handbook-by-marvin-danig#f... Disclosure: It's my work.
    - cptskippy 6y ago
      Anyone can create a PDF form to capture data and signatures, email it to someone who can then fill it out offline, and then email it back. That's not something easily done with a webpage, and it's not something my mom can do. PDFs are easy to make and easy to work with. Web pages aren't. Your work is impressive, and why would anyone want that? Do you envision lawyers putting all their legal contracts into fancy flippy books?
      - marvindanig 6y ago
        > Do you envision lawyers putting all their legal contracts into fancy flippy books? Someone will have to solve it for the lawyers in a not so 'fancy consumerish' way. Point is that it is possible to do that, and Firefox shouldn't be solving this problem using an ancient format and a layer of cruft in between.
        cptskippy 6y ago
        But we have PDF today and everyone is already using it. What does this bring to the table that's improved over PDF from a user's perspective? You can be a developer who enjoys the smell of your own farts all day long but that doesn't mean anyone else wants to smell them.
        marvindanig 6y ago
        Well, if you sit so close to someone's opinions or comments on the Internet, wouldn't you have to smell whatever whether you like it or not? ;-)
    - minerjoe 6y ago
      Wish I could look at your work but my browser doesn't support javascript. I wonder what it is about.
      - marvindanig 6y ago
        Those books do work without javascript. Go troll someone else.
- f1refly 6y ago
  Distributing a document with functioning kerning and embedded fonts that works offline
  - marvindanig 6y ago
    Serviceworkers+@font-faces+font-kerning property of CSS3. Done, next.
    - yzmtf2008 6y ago
      I think you missed the point of distributing. I’m never going to let you email me your serviceworkers because I can’t forward this document to anyone without relying on you hosting a server / not changing the content.
      - marvindanig 6y ago
        Oh, I'm all in for email/attachment based distribution. Just not with Firefox sporting it on the web browser where you'd in all certainty require someone to host a server and for you to trust them that no changes have been made to the content. That was the entire point of my comment at the top.
- edflsafoiewq 6y ago
  Going to a particular page and only having to render that one page. Large HTML documents are unwieldy.
  - beervirus 6y ago
    The modern web is slow for a lot of reasons, but none of them are about rendering lots of static html. Anyway just break things up into multiple pages if necessary.
derefr 6y ago
Yes, maybe generally; but let’s talk about the specific case here — filling of complex PDF forms. When a PDF that has interactive form fields, calculated auto-populated fields, fields that are enabled/disabled according to the inputs of other fields, etc. — the organization that created it (usually government or education) usually does that because they want you to fill it out using a PDF viewer; save it (which will persist the form inputs “into” the resulting PDF); and then submit the modified PDF file back to them. They want this, because they can use automated backend processes to extract the data from the PDF. They don’t want you to just print out the thing and fill it out. In fact, many such “fillable” PDFs start off in a state with many of their form-fields disabled and voided, such that printing them out in that state would result in a form you can’t really write on! So, at that point, why didn’t they just make the PDF a web page? They’ve essentially reinvented a web form, but with extra steps. The only benefit a client gets is the ability to edit and save the form offline (but that can be done in a browser, too, with local storage); and furthermore, the ability to treat the resulting filled form as a file, moving it around before you submit it. But the cases where you need that are very niche, compared to the cases where you can just direct employees to your Intranet portal.
- cptskippy 6y ago
  The use case you're describing wasn't feasible until about 20 years after PDFs were introduced. Web Storage isn't that old, has only recently become widely deployed, and in a lot of cases is disabled for security concerns.
- vonmoltke 6y ago
  > In fact, many such “fillable” PDFs start off in a state with many of their form-fields disabled and voided, such that printing them out in that state would result in a form you can’t really write on! I have never seen this. Do you have an example? Every use if fillable PDFs I have encountered is a use case where submitting a handwritten form is still an option. > The only benefit a client gets is the ability to edit and save the form offline (but that can be done in a browser, too, with local storage); and furthermore, the ability to treat the resulting filled form as a file, moving it around before you submit it. I have yet to see a web form that actually saves a readable, properly-formatted, self-contained, easy to access, fully-offline copy. > But the cases where you need that are very niche, compared to the cases where you can just direct employees to your Intranet portal. This is not a trivial need; most forms sent as fillable PDFs need to or should be retained for some period after submission. Also, I don't know what "employees" and "Intranet" has to do with anything. You are also missing the use case where a form legally requires a live signature from one or more parties and need to be printed, even if just to scan and return. I recently had to do this for some insurance paperwork.

rk06 6y ago

PDF is widely used and supported. And FWIW, edge does support it.

cptskippy 6y ago

> It's an accessibility nightmare with no obvious advantage over simple ordinary webpages. It is easy to criticize something when you don't look back at the historical context through which it emerged. It has plenty of advantages over HTML but they're easy to dismiss if you don't have a use case for them.

inetknght 6y ago
> It has plenty of advantages over HTML but they're easy to dismiss if you don't have a use case for them. Can you discuss some of the advantages? The only advantage that comes to mind is that Apple has built-in support for writing PDFs and that has a lot to do with Adobe rather than PDF being a better candidate.
- toyg 6y ago
  PDF prints infinitely better than HTML, and it can be somewhat hardened against modification by average users. If you think MSOffice users would prefer to output HTML over PDF, you don't live in the same corporate world I inhabit.
- tdhz77 6y ago
  I work for US Federal courts, I can assure you html isn’t sufficient over PDF’s for court cases. Evidence are filed in pdfs. Documents (PDFs) need to be a historical archive, and the ability to modify would damage the credibility of those documents.
  - marvindanig 6y ago
    Yeah, but does Firefox need to solve the use-case of a court system? Also, tangentially the solution to guarantee "tamperproof" archiving is in cryptography and that's not a feature of PDF.
    - yzmtf2008 6y ago
      No, Firefox doesn’t need to support the use case of a court system. That’s not what GP is saying. All we’re establishing here is that PDF is a useful format, and Firefox is supporting it. Also, cryptographic signatures do happen to be a feature of PDF.

toyg 6y ago

> Why is Firefox spending all their money and goodwill I doubt "all" their money goes towards the pdf-reader bit. And tbh, I'd say nobody will really lower their goodwill towards Mozilla because they add features that a lot of people actually need.