3 ms·
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 histo
by 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 agoYeah, 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 agoNo, 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.
- marvindanig 6y agoNow that I read my comment I see the issue with it. What I meant to say is that Firefox should focus on implementing cryptographic signing over HTML then. And not a PDF viewer on the web--in that, enabling cryptographic signatures isn't tied to the format PDF per se.
- kevincox 6y ago> ability to modify How are PDFs any less modifiable than HTML other than requiring (widely available) specialized tools instead of a text editor?
- endless1234 6y agoCryptographic signing is a core feature of PDF, but not HTML.