[KLUG Members] pdf v document attachments

[Jason Edward Durrett]

On Dec 21, 2005, at 10:06 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

>> At a recent KLUG meeting someone noted that in business people don't
>> send email attachments as word processing documents but rather almost
>> always use pdf's.
>
> That was, in part, me.

I wish my experience were so.  I have to deal with multiple formats - 
doc, rtf, xls, pdf, tif  etc.  For small customers and vendors that is 
understandable.  But even large customers with 200 page edi compliance 
manuals send out some weird stuff.  As for vendors, I just got a 
container quote in my mailbox as an xls -  that from one of the largest 
logistics providers around!


>
>> If this is correct, it raised a number of questions for me, as the
>> experience in academia seems different
>
> No surprise there,  I think (and my admittadly limited experience 
> supports) that what is
> really at play mostly in academia is a lack of systematic processes as 
> well
> as even crappiwr user training than in a corporate environment.
>

This I agree with . . .  but I think there is also a problem in the 
business community that there is not a standard document format.  In 
addition, even though a company might have a standard, the buyer might 
not be trained to use it and as a vendor I can not piss off the buyer 
by saying I can not read his purchase order.  So, the lack of standards 
and processes continues.

>> --for example, my wife and I
>> regularly send and receive document attachments: scholarly papers,
>> letters
>
> Sure,  I see the same thing in many soho situations.
>
>> (to retain formatting
>
> The key here is that they are nor REALLY accomplishing this.  Just near
> enough that most of the time they don't notice.
>
>> resumes and CVs, etc.  Even journals want articles submitted in Word
>
> Really!  Must again be an academic thing,  because it certainly is NOT 
> true
> of any publication I've communicated with.
>
>> format. (Probably because they need to be edited.)
>
> I doubt it.  Most publications will strip all your formatting and redo 
> it
> to match there style and standard.

Yep.  Any editor who would just pass on a document is not doing his job 
- ie editing for style and standard of the publication.


>> 1.  Why would it be considered better to send these as pdfs rather 
>> than
>> as documents?
>
> Security.  Opening an M$-Office document from an unknown computer is a
> virus enabling practice.
>

And, I would add, that contrary to popular belief not everyone can read 
a .doc

>> (One reason is that, by design, pdf's are "portable
>> documents" and should create fewer problems opening them if one has a
>> different word processor
>
> You don't even need a word processor.  Just a PDF viewer.
>

And a PDF viewer can be downloaded at no cost and there are many free 
PDF viewers . . . .

>> --it was also noted that rtf is designed for
>> this purpose.)  Are there other reasons, reasons that would apply as
>> well in academia, that businesses send email attachments as pdf?
>
> Archival purposes.  You *WILL* be able to open and view a PDF 5 or 10 
> years
> from now.  You do NOT know that thus is true of an M$-Office document. 
>  And
> as someone with old doc files I think any confidence on this issue is
> misplaced.

>> 2. As far as I know, MS Office does not have capacity to convert a doc
>> to pdf.
>
> Nope
>

Hmm, I wonder why that is . . .  :)


>> So far as I know, most college professors do not as a matter of
>> course have access to other software for creating pdfs.
>
> I have no idea what software they have, on our network you don't need 
> any.
>

If they have access to the net than they can create pdf's - there are 
many solutions out there.


>> Do businesses
>> provide everyone with such access
>
> Yes, it is trivial to provide this functionality as a "network 
> pronter."
> ___

It is only a question if they use the network printer or are lazy and 
send the document out in whatever format they learned when they first 
started - probably why I deal with so many different document formats.