In message <266A4D6A4BC4722364791F3A(_at_)p3(_dot_)JCK(_dot_)COM>, John C
--On Thursday, 05 January, 2006 12:46 -0500 "Gray, Eric"
I believe - for the record - that Post-Script is also
It is indeed. And it, as well as PDF, are allowed in RFCs (see
As others have noted, an ASCII form is still required. I
consider that a feature and, for various worst cases,
futureproofing, but some others do not.
And, as yet others have noted, it would be wise for us to get
very specific about versioning and permitted feature-sets for
PDF. It is arguably even more important to get specific about
versions and feature sets for PS although my own personal
opinion is that, given PDF, Postscript has about outlived its
usefulness as a separate posting format. YMMD, of course, and
this thread on the IETF list is probably not the optimal way to
address that question in any event.
Producing good, portable PDF isn't obvious. I just added the following
text to a Call for Papers of a conference I'm chairing, based on many
sad experiences trying to read random PDF files submitted by others:
PDF users should use "Type 1" fonts instead of "Type 3", and
should "Embed" and "Subset" all fonts. You can find
instructions on how to do this at
Among the problems I've encountered have been version skew, missing
fonts (especially Asian language fonts that are frequently not
installed elsewhere), fuzzy text from LaTeX users who are generating
bitmap fonts, ligatures getting changed into weird characters, and more.
When I sent the PDF for the second edition of my book to the publisher,
I had to use these options to dvips:
-P pdf -G0
-dMaxSubsetPct=100 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.3 -dSubsetFonts=true
for ps2pdf. (I've left out the resolution.) I should note that it
didn't work, either -- but if I sent them the PS, they could convert it
to PDF. We never did figure out that problem....
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
Ietf mailing list