Over the past few mouths I've received more unusable PDFs then I've
ever received usable PDFs. Well maybe that's an exaggeration, but it
still doesn't excuse the large number of broken documents in this format
I've received.

I have asked senders to choose a better format, but they keep coming.
Many sites that have PDFs as part of there content do not seam to be
having this problem it's when I get PDFs send via email that there are
issues. I just got an email from NetApp with a PDF I can't read, so
the problem is starting to manifest itself in the form of missed
important communications.

Mostly I'd just like a forum to complain, but if some one has a
suggestion I'm willing to hear them out.

As this issue does effect Debian the issue is not specific to Debian.
There are several Debian packages that will help, but they are not
available every where and keeping these packages updated would be hard.

Perhaps I could use gs or something on a webserver, then at least I'd
only have to worried about keeping a single copy working. That still
doesn't solve the problem of PDS that simply can't be read by any
usual means.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06/25/08 17:33, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> Over the past few mouths I've received more unusable PDFs then I've
> ever received usable PDFs. Well maybe that's an exaggeration, but it
> still doesn't excuse the large number of broken documents in this format
> I've received.
>
> I have asked senders to choose a better format, but they keep coming.
> Many sites that have PDFs as part of there content do not seam to be
> having this problem it's when I get PDFs send via email that there are
> issues. I just got an email from NetApp with a PDF I can't read, so
> the problem is starting to manifest itself in the form of missed
> important communications.
>
> Mostly I'd just like a forum to complain, but if some one has a
> suggestion I'm willing to hear them out.
>
> As this issue does effect Debian the issue is not specific to Debian.
> There are several Debian packages that will help, but they are not
> available every where and keeping these packages updated would be hard.
>
> Perhaps I could use gs or something on a webserver, then at least I'd
> only have to worried about keeping a single copy working. That still
> doesn't solve the problem of PDS that simply can't be read by any
> usual means.

You aren't giving us much to work with...

(a) What DE & PDF reader are you using?

(b) Have you tried acroread?

(c) What kind of errors are you receiving?

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA

"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
York is doomed."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhi7k8ACgkQS9HxQb37XmcGkQCcDQTiZc86AS nKdFu0SWGAQDBu
YDEAnRGurOiaNdCMEFrs3nd5+lor+SEB
=NQKt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 08:18:08PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 06/25/08 17:33, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> > Over the past few mouths I've received more unusable PDFs then I've
> > ever received usable PDFs. Well maybe that's an exaggeration, but it
> > still doesn't excuse the large number of broken documents in this format
> > I've received.
> >
> > I have asked senders to choose a better format, but they keep coming.
> > Many sites that have PDFs as part of there content do not seam to be
> > having this problem it's when I get PDFs send via email that there are
> > issues. I just got an email from NetApp with a PDF I can't read, so
> > the problem is starting to manifest itself in the form of missed
> > important communications.
> >
> > Mostly I'd just like a forum to complain, but if some one has a
> > suggestion I'm willing to hear them out.
> >
> > As this issue does effect Debian the issue is not specific to Debian.
> > There are several Debian packages that will help, but they are not
> > available every where and keeping these packages updated would be hard.
> >
> > Perhaps I could use gs or something on a webserver, then at least I'd
> > only have to worried about keeping a single copy working. That still
> > doesn't solve the problem of PDS that simply can't be read by any
> > usual means.
>
> You aren't giving us much to work with...
>
Thank you for replying. Please CC me as I'm no-longer on the list.

I'm CCing Ron as I don't expect my comment will be un-delayed
reaching the rest of the list. Any advice for posting by non-list
members?

I think the problem lies in education of the makers of PDFs. I'd like
to just plain see them use another format, but if I can get them to
use software that's better supported then that would make every one
happier.

I'm also not happy with the usage and support of ShockWaveFlash, but
the issue there is much more under control then this PDF problem.

> (a) What DE & PDF reader are you using?
>
What could be better then any copy of GS made after 2000?

GPL Ghostscript 8.15 (2004-09-22)

I've attempted to recompile a newer copy, but the OS(SunOS 5.8) I'm on
won't support it. "File / Save as -> Office 1997?" I'm sure many of
the users will still remember as I do.

I'm sure it doesn't matter or at least it shouldn't. If there are
differences between readers, then that's the problem I'm complaining
about. It's not useful if I need to be using 3 readers to read all
the documents that I come across.

Perhaps a PDF chooser should be written to look at the features used in
the documents that then forward to the correct reader. It would be
better to have a PDF sanitizer that would correct errors and un-role
features that are less supported, but I feel if such a program existed
it would make a better reader.

I would not at all mind having to install a PDF wrapper, that depends
on and makes use of a wide variety of readers. Making each reader use
a similar skin would be a worth-while effort.

> (b) Have you tried acroread?
>
This will not work on many handheld device? As well as most of my
Desktops(PPC64 and FreeBSD). Ohh, but it will work on my Sparc. Is
it text-only for my ssh sessions or will I need to bother with X over
slow links? I'll find out.

I'm using a reader that works on all the platforms Debian works on.
Perhaps if I'm on another platform it's not nessissary to use the same
reader I use on every other platform, so long as I'm using a reader
that's able to open most documents. Maybe acroread should be made to
work on other platforms using virtual machine technology, like qemu.

Mostly the issue is the work needed to install it. No-longer part of
Debian.

> (c) What kind of errors are you receiving?
>
All kinds, usually beginning with "%%". The last error I got reported
that EOF had trailing garbage. Basically every type of I don't
understand this feature, true type font not included, I couldn't parse
input at BLAH.

I'm sure all of these are related to poor software creating the PDFs.
Perhaps I'd like to see there being a black list, so I could direct
ppl to it and either suggest they upgrade or that they should use one
of these other programs that will work.

> --
> Ron Johnson, Jr.
> Jefferson LA USA
>
> "Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
> York is doomed."
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>

--
/************************************************** **************
* Mike Mestnik: Junior Admin 612-395-8932 *
* mmestnik@visi.com VISI *
************************************************** **************/
Alt address: collections@spam.visi.com


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06/27/08 10:12, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 08:18:08PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On 06/25/08 17:33, Mike Mestnik wrote:
>>> Over the past few mouths I've received more unusable PDFs then I've
>>> ever received usable PDFs. Well maybe that's an exaggeration, but it
>>> still doesn't excuse the large number of broken documents in this format
>>> I've received.
>>>
>>> I have asked senders to choose a better format, but they keep coming.
>>> Many sites that have PDFs as part of there content do not seam to be
>>> having this problem it's when I get PDFs send via email that there are
>>> issues. I just got an email from NetApp with a PDF I can't read, so
>>> the problem is starting to manifest itself in the form of missed
>>> important communications.
>>>
>>> Mostly I'd just like a forum to complain, but if some one has a
>>> suggestion I'm willing to hear them out.
>>>
>>> As this issue does effect Debian the issue is not specific to Debian.
>>> There are several Debian packages that will help, but they are not
>>> available every where and keeping these packages updated would be hard.
>>>
>>> Perhaps I could use gs or something on a webserver, then at least I'd
>>> only have to worried about keeping a single copy working. That still
>>> doesn't solve the problem of PDS that simply can't be read by any
>>> usual means.
>> You aren't giving us much to work with...
>>
> Thank you for replying. Please CC me as I'm no-longer on the list.
>
> I'm CCing Ron as I don't expect my comment will be un-delayed
> reaching the rest of the list. Any advice for posting by non-list
> members?
>
> I think the problem lies in education of the makers of PDFs. I'd like
> to just plain see them use another format, but if I can get them to
> use software that's better supported then that would make every one
> happier.
>
> I'm also not happy with the usage and support of ShockWaveFlash, but
> the issue there is much more under control then this PDF problem.
>
>> (a) What DE & PDF reader are you using?
>>
> What could be better then any copy of GS made after 2000?
>
> GPL Ghostscript 8.15 (2004-09-22)

That's kinda old. Debian Sid uses v8.62 (2008-02-29).

> I've attempted to recompile a newer copy, but the OS(SunOS 5.8) I'm on
> won't support it. "File / Save as -> Office 1997?" I'm sure many of
> the users will still remember as I do.

Hmmm. That's Not Debian, and a pretty ancient Not Debian...

Are you sure that you're on the correct list, or am I misreading you?

> I'm sure it doesn't matter or at least it shouldn't. If there are
> differences between readers, then that's the problem I'm complaining
> about. It's not useful if I need to be using 3 readers to read all
> the documents that I come across.
>
> Perhaps a PDF chooser should be written to look at the features used in
> the documents that then forward to the correct reader. It would be
> better to have a PDF sanitizer that would correct errors and un-role
> features that are less supported, but I feel if such a program existed
> it would make a better reader.
>
> I would not at all mind having to install a PDF wrapper, that depends
> on and makes use of a wide variety of readers. Making each reader use
> a similar skin would be a worth-while effort.
>
>> (b) Have you tried acroread?
>>
> This will not work on many handheld device? As well as most of my
> Desktops(PPC64 and FreeBSD). Ohh, but it will work on my Sparc. Is
> it text-only for my ssh sessions or will I need to bother with X over
> slow links? I'll find out.
>
> I'm using a reader that works on all the platforms Debian works on.
> Perhaps if I'm on another platform it's not nessissary to use the same
> reader I use on every other platform, so long as I'm using a reader
> that's able to open most documents. Maybe acroread should be made to
> work on other platforms using virtual machine technology, like qemu.
>
> Mostly the issue is the work needed to install it. No-longer part of
> Debian.
>
>> (c) What kind of errors are you receiving?
>>
> All kinds, usually beginning with "%%". The last error I got reported
> that EOF had trailing garbage. Basically every type of I don't
> understand this feature, true type font not included, I couldn't parse
> input at BLAH.
>
> I'm sure all of these are related to poor software creating the PDFs.
> Perhaps I'd like to see there being a black list, so I could direct
> ppl to it and either suggest they upgrade or that they should use one
> of these other programs that will work.
>

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA

"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
York is doomed."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhlCooACgkQS9HxQb37XmcgAwCeIUQ+WxRP1i i2HwY0UBdIlwZx
qFsAoONTg0oxx99aKEbvd5PlYNJz4zN7
=rUUX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

2008/6/27 Mike Mestnik <mmestnik@visi.com>:
....


The trouble here seems to be, at least in part, that Adobe feels at liberty
to extend the PDF spec without caring about users with non-Adobe readers.
Adobe probably won't alter its approach unless it feels a significant
community backlash is brewing.

Another problem is that there is an increasing number of programs with PDF
output that are not strict about even some fairly well-established parts of
the spec. The developers of these programs probably test the output only in
Acrord32, if they test it at all. That's like declaring a web site
well-coded if it looks okay in IE.

I'm not sure what to do about either of these problems, except to suggest
greater community investment in cross-platform FLOSS PDF readers, writers,
validators and plug-ins.

Sam

2008/6/27 Mike Mestnik <mmestnik@visi.com>:
....


The trouble here seems to be, at least in part, that Adobe feels at liberty
to extend the PDF spec without caring about users with non-Adobe readers.
Adobe probably won't alter its approach unless it feels a significant
community backlash is brewing.

Another problem is that there is an increasing number of programs with PDF
output that are not strict about even some fairly well-established parts of
the spec. The developers of these programs probably test the output only in
Acrord32, if they test it at all. That's like declaring a web site
well-coded if it looks okay in IE.

I'm not sure what to do about either of these problems, except to suggest
greater community investment in cross-platform FLOSS PDF readers, writers,
validators and plug-ins.

Sam

2008/6/27 Mike Mestnik <mmestnik@visi.com>:

> I would really appreciate a website that outlined these issues that I
> could direct ppl too, after they send me content that is not readable.


Good idea. Why not set one up? You could make a page on ghostscript.com or
set up your own site at whatswrongwithpdf.org or some other suitable domain.
If the latter, there are plenty of hosts that will provide you with a
domain, a little bit of web hosting space and a web site building tool for a
$20/yr or less (or you can roll your own if you know how).


> Would you object to me using the list archives?


Given that the list archives are publicly accessible, there shouldn't be a
problem. The only snag is that (as Ron pointed out) the list archives are
Debian specific. Users on other OSes might find this confusing. Since you
want to explain why they should be more careful about PDFs, without
confusing them, you're probably better of setting up a generally-applicable
page/site, as outlined above.

Sam

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 10:43:07AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 06/27/08 10:12, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 08:18:08PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> >> On 06/25/08 17:33, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> >>> Over the past few mouths I've received more unusable PDFs then I've
> >>> ever received usable PDFs. Well maybe that's an exaggeration, but it
> >>> still doesn't excuse the large number of broken documents in this format
> >>> I've received.
> >>>
> >>> I have asked senders to choose a better format, but they keep coming.
> >>> Many sites that have PDFs as part of there content do not seam to be
> >>> having this problem it's when I get PDFs send via email that there are
> >>> issues. I just got an email from NetApp with a PDF I can't read, so
> >>> the problem is starting to manifest itself in the form of missed
> >>> important communications.
> >>>
> >>> Mostly I'd just like a forum to complain, but if some one has a
> >>> suggestion I'm willing to hear them out.
> >>>
> >>> As this issue does effect Debian the issue is not specific to Debian.
> >>> There are several Debian packages that will help, but they are not
> >>> available every where and keeping these packages updated would be hard.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps I could use gs or something on a webserver, then at least I'd
> >>> only have to worried about keeping a single copy working. That still
> >>> doesn't solve the problem of PDS that simply can't be read by any
> >>> usual means.
> >> You aren't giving us much to work with...
> >>
> > Thank you for replying. Please CC me as I'm no-longer on the list.
> >
> > I'm CCing Ron as I don't expect my comment will be un-delayed
> > reaching the rest of the list. Any advice for posting by non-list
> > members?
> >
> > I think the problem lies in education of the makers of PDFs. I'd like
> > to just plain see them use another format, but if I can get them to
> > use software that's better supported then that would make every one
> > happier.
> >
> > I'm also not happy with the usage and support of ShockWaveFlash, but
> > the issue there is much more under control then this PDF problem.
> >
> >> (a) What DE & PDF reader are you using?
> >>
> > What could be better then any copy of GS made after 2000?
> >
> > GPL Ghostscript 8.15 (2004-09-22)
>
> That's kinda old. Debian Sid uses v8.62 (2008-02-29).
>
> > I've attempted to recompile a newer copy, but the OS(SunOS 5.8) I'm on
> > won't support it. "File / Save as -> Office 1997?" I'm sure many of
> > the users will still remember as I do.
>
> Hmmm. That's Not Debian, and a pretty ancient Not Debian...
>
> Are you sure that you're on the correct list, or am I misreading you?
>
This is just one example of what I'm talking about, there are more.

mmestnik@mephisto:~$ uname -a
Linux mephisto 2.6.18-4-ppc64 #1 SMP Fri Mar 30 13:01:29 UTC 2007
ppc64 GNU/Linux
mmestnik@mephisto:~$ gs -v
ESP Ghostscript 8.15.3 (2006-08-25)
Copyright (C) 2004 artofcode LLC, Benicia, CA. All rights reserved.
mmestnik@mephisto:~$ schroot uname -- -a
I: [ppc32 chroot] Running command: "uname -a"
Linux mephisto 2.6.18-4-ppc64 #1 SMP Fri Mar 30 13:01:29 UTC 2007 ppc
GNU/Linux
mmestnik@mephisto:~$ schroot gs -- -v
I: [ppc32 chroot] Running command: "gs -v"
ESP Ghostscript 8.15.3 (2006-08-25)
Copyright (C) 2004 artofcode LLC, Benicia, CA. All rights reserved.

The usage of PDFs is crippling my abbility to read things, I thought I
would find others here that felt the same.

It would be nice if I could upload PDFs to google, or something local,
so I could read them.

> > I'm sure it doesn't matter or at least it shouldn't. If there are
> > differences between readers, then that's the problem I'm complaining
> > about. It's not useful if I need to be using 3 readers to read all
> > the documents that I come across.
> >
> > Perhaps a PDF chooser should be written to look at the features used in
> > the documents that then forward to the correct reader. It would be
> > better to have a PDF sanitizer that would correct errors and un-role
> > features that are less supported, but I feel if such a program existed
> > it would make a better reader.
> >
> > I would not at all mind having to install a PDF wrapper, that depends
> > on and makes use of a wide variety of readers. Making each reader use
> > a similar skin would be a worth-while effort.
> >
> >> (b) Have you tried acroread?
> >>
> > This will not work on many handheld device? As well as most of my
> > Desktops(PPC64 and FreeBSD). Ohh, but it will work on my Sparc. Is
> > it text-only for my ssh sessions or will I need to bother with X over
> > slow links? I'll find out.
> >
> > I'm using a reader that works on all the platforms Debian works on.
> > Perhaps if I'm on another platform it's not nessissary to use the same
> > reader I use on every other platform, so long as I'm using a reader
> > that's able to open most documents. Maybe acroread should be made to
> > work on other platforms using virtual machine technology, like qemu.
> >
> > Mostly the issue is the work needed to install it. No-longer part of
> > Debian.
> >
> >> (c) What kind of errors are you receiving?
> >>
> > All kinds, usually beginning with "%%". The last error I got reported
> > that EOF had trailing garbage. Basically every type of I don't
> > understand this feature, true type font not included, I couldn't parse
> > input at BLAH.
> >
> > I'm sure all of these are related to poor software creating the PDFs.
> > Perhaps I'd like to see there being a black list, so I could direct
> > ppl to it and either suggest they upgrade or that they should use one
> > of these other programs that will work.
> >
>
> --
> Ron Johnson, Jr.
> Jefferson LA USA
>
> "Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
> York is doomed."

--
/************************************************** **************
* Mike Mestnik: Junior Admin 612-395-8932 *
* mmestnik@visi.com VISI *
************************************************** **************/
Alt address: collections@spam.visi.com


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 05:21:24PM +0100, Sam Kuper wrote:
> 2008/6/27 Mike Mestnik <mmestnik@visi.com>:
> ...
>
>
> The trouble here seems to be, at least in part, that Adobe feels at liberty
> to extend the PDF spec without caring about users with non-Adobe readers.
> Adobe probably won't alter its approach unless it feels a significant
> community backlash is brewing.
>
> Another problem is that there is an increasing number of programs with PDF
> output that are not strict about even some fairly well-established parts of
> the spec. The developers of these programs probably test the output only in
> Acrord32, if they test it at all. That's like declaring a web site
> well-coded if it looks okay in IE.
>
> I'm not sure what to do about either of these problems, except to suggest
> greater community investment in cross-platform FLOSS PDF readers, writers,
> validators and plug-ins.
>
I would really appreciate a website that outlined these issues that I
could direct ppl too, after they send me content that is not readable.

Would you object to me using the list archives?

> Sam

--
/************************************************** **************
* Mike Mestnik: Junior Admin 612-395-8932 *
* mmestnik@visi.com VISI *
************************************************** **************/
Alt address: collections@spam.visi.com


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 07:56:23PM +0100, Sam Kuper wrote:
> 2008/6/27 Mike Mestnik <mmestnik@visi.com>:
>
> > I would really appreciate a website that outlined these issues that I
> > could direct ppl too, after they send me content that is not readable.
>
>
> Good idea. Why not set one up? You could make a page on ghostscript.com or

As the complaning user my remarks are both illrelevent and bias. If
ppl listend to me I would not have anything to complain about. As
much as I'd like that I'm not sure I can bring it to reality, unles
this was a group effort.

I will however make said site, I don't much like the content of my
current home page.

http://users.visi.com/~mmestnik/

> set up your own site at whatswrongwithpdf.org or some other suitable domain.
> If the latter, there are plenty of hosts that will provide you with a
> domain, a little bit of web hosting space and a web site building tool for a
> $20/yr or less (or you can roll your own if you know how).
>
>
> > Would you object to me using the list archives?
>
>
> Given that the list archives are publicly accessible, there shouldn't be a
> problem. The only snag is that (as Ron pointed out) the list archives are
> Debian specific. Users on other OSes might find this confusing. Since you
> want to explain why they should be more careful about PDFs, without
> confusing them, you're probably better of setting up a generally-applicable
> page/site, as outlined above.
>
> Sam

--
/************************************************** **************
* Mike Mestnik: Junior Admin 612-395-8932 *
* mmestnik@visi.com VISI *
************************************************** **************/
Alt address: collections@spam.visi.com


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org