[user24]

> Is a PDF download really so bad?

I much prefer a PDF menu. In fact I actively look for a menu download link when I eat out, which is often. It reassures me that I'm seeing exactly the same menu that I'll see when I sit down at the table. Too often the website has a little bit of html showing a 'typical menu', and I'm left simply not knowing if the food on the site is the food you're offering tonight.

But when I see a PDF that's clearly exactly what was sent to the menu printing company, that's perfect. Too often I've sat down in a restaurant, looked over the menu and thought "actually, there's nothing here I really fancy".

[mgkimsal]

It'd be nice to have both, but the PDF is often too small to read on most screens, requires a lot of scrolling, etc.

Similarly, just because you have a PDF menu doesn't mean they have the food on the menu.

PDF menus that simply say "daily soup" or "ask for our specials" are pretty much designed for in-store use only, and basically useless on the web for decision making. When you're in a restaurant already seated, you can deal with uncertainty by ordering something different. When you're on the web, you deal with uncertainty by going someplace else altogether.

[dunham]

I think for the places we go to, a PDF menu is more likely to be accurate. The menus tend to change every few days and PDF is more likely to be part of the menu creation process than HTML.

My favorite restaurant (contigosf.com) just uploads a jpg of the menu - kinda unfortunate, but on the plus side they update it daily.

[user24]

yeah all good points. If there was a html menu that delivered the same confidence as a PDF menu the that would be much better, as the html version would be more usable on mobile devices etc etc (and just generally more webby).