4 ms·
Adobe was not paying Mozilla for anything like that. Chrome simply includes a paid closed-source product (FoxIt, iirc). This was and is not an option for Mozill
by joshmoz 14y ago
Adobe was not paying Mozilla for anything like that. Chrome simply includes a paid closed-source product (FoxIt, iirc). This was and is not an option for Mozilla for multiple reasons.
It took Mozilla a while to get here, which is unfortunate, but the result is an open-source PDF reader that doesn't add yet another binary rendering engine to the browser (think security, hack-ability). Creating it made Gecko and the web platform better, because it pushed us. There is more work to do, but it's a great start and a welcome change to how these features are implemented.
A bit more info in a blog post that I wrote:
https://boomswaggerboom.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/exciting-stuff-firefox-19s-built-in-pdf-reader/ https://boomswaggerboom.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/exciting-st...
- Ygg2 14y agoInterestingly, there are also a prototype Flash in JavaScript called Shumway: https://github.com/mozilla/shumway https://github.com/mozilla/shumway And an IIUC a DOM renderer in JS https://github.com/andreasgal/dom.js/ https://github.com/andreasgal/dom.js/ I don't know if PDF.js will ever reach full PDF compatibility (with all it's weird forms and other stuff), but I do hope so. With a liberal licence I can totally see people embedding pdf.js to render their pdfs on site.