@James Gifford—NitroPress wrote:
As with EPUB, we need a new generation of PDF, one that is adequately controlled, licensed/approved and rated right from the beginning, without letting each shop and developer and doc designer hack around with "improvements" and "better ideas."
That's never going to happen, because it's up to each individual developer how much functionality they want to include in their app; not something anyone can control. Unless Adobe were to make a new, closed standard, that only they can make readers for. (Reminds me of the old Microsoft Silverlight framework, which was discontinued.)
It's quite simple: if their app doesn't pass a validation/regression testing suite, they can't call it "EPUB4" or "XPDF" or whatever. That point should have never been conceded for either existing standard.
Anyone is free to create a crappy, idiosyncratic, noncompliant reader that —
- is free.
- is cheaper.
- is "faster."
- has a "smaller footprint."
- isn't from Adobe, those b*stards.
- has a super-pretty interface.
- runs on every Chinese smartphone.
- is branded as "PDF/EPUB/WhatEver" compliant, really!
- easily embeds on the social media platform of your choice.
...and so forth. And what we have is a market of "PDF readers" and "EPUB viewers" that are all of the above, without having to put a single qualifiying note or asterisk or omit the licensed name of the standard.
And so we have a market and universe of craptastic, half-functional doc readers that simply frustrate most of the user base, who blame "PDF" and "Adobe" when neither is actually at any fault.
But, by all means, developer freedom. Yay.