Wouter wrote:
Standard GNU/Linux have a few pdf-readers, like xpdf, kghostview, gv,ggv. KDE and OpenOffice can print to PDF. Many of these programs are GPL, so what could Adobe do about that?
The GPL is irrelevant here since Adobe holds the PDF patents. This fact simply makes me feel uneasy - that doesn't mean we shouldn't use HTML->PDF convertors since obviously Adobe thinks its best interests are served by trying to get as many people hooked on PDF as possible (at least for the moment).
The worse thing that would happen is that we would have to stop if Adobe suddenly did the same thing that the MP3 people did and start the process of charging licensing fees /after/ their file format was firmly entrenched. IIRC their patent claims over PS are more dubious and thus less enforceable (if not expired). That makes me feel a bit less uneasy - a free alternative (akin to Ogg Vorbis using the sound example) would be great but isn't even close to being a reality. It just would be a shame if we got hooked on the pdf thing and also got stung.
--mav
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Op di 29-07-2003, om 20:51 schreef Daniel Mayer:
The GPL is irrelevant here since Adobe holds the PDF patents.
But GPL has clauses concerning patents. It demands a royalty-free license for all. Even more, GNU Ghostscript is an official GNU-package, and is downloadable from gnu.org. The FSF refuses to use gif-images on their pages because of patents. So I cannot imagine they would apply different standards concerning pdf.
http://www.gnu.org/software/ghostscript/intro.html Ghostscript has several main uses: 1. Display a PostScript or PDF file (avoid killing trees). 2. Convert a PostScript file to a PDF (or vice versa)
However, PDF is not an open standard because it is controlled by a single vendor, and not some standards body. But unlike Word/doc, it is fully documented.
Wouter
textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org