4 ms·
If I send someone a PDF document, I know exactly how it will look for them on screen and on paper. HTML, not so much.
by jaywalk 4y ago
If I send someone a PDF document, I know exactly how it will look for them on screen and on paper.
HTML, not so much.
- SllX 4y agoSure. Part of that is PDF’s restrictiveness. We either value the consistency, value the flexibility or pick the appropriate format for the application. Basic HTML gets you something readable with any HTML renderer, and you can pretty much count on it, but not to the same degree or certainty as you can with a PDF (and bad PDF renderers exist too). You can still read a book in it. HTML+other stuff is where it gets dicey, and temptations like on-demand loading and endless scrolling, or “rich” features like dictionary lookups (that my OS already natively supports in any application from any text selection including the web browser) start to make reading a book this way sound like a bad idea and PDF starts to sound a lot more appealing. All I’m saying is when PDF starts to sound like the wrong choice, consider HTML. Not HTML plus stuff, just HTML. Maybe a very very light touch of CSS if you’re feeling fancy, but it’s really not necessary.
- notRobot 4y agoHTML should be used for books and stuff. (Accessible) PDF should be used when you want to control exactly how it looks on the receiving end, but this should be a rare use case.