| > there are no available solutions that meet the specs I listed We're going in circles. "Preserve presentation across platforms" is an anti-feature. No one has created a solution that satisfies that constraint because it's (a) a lot of work for (b) something that is the opposite of what the people involved are actually aiming for. If you're preparing material for print and it's important to be able to represent the exact printed layout (e.g. to print again), then PDF makes sense. If printing doesn't appear in the pipeline twice or even once, then PDF is very, very bad. > I much prefer PDFs to blog posts, personally - they are mine, I can annotate them, etc. You can do that with blog posts. > I find much more thought is put into a PDF than a blog post I don't. I find, as I alluded to before, that there's much less thought put into trying to express things clearly and economically. Instead, that concern is replaced with a concern for writing in a way that sounds "academic" but is painful to read. PS: > ePub is 'responsibly wielded HTML' Not at all. EPUB is very irresponsibly designed. "The format works in my browser today" should have been the #1 sanity check on that workgroup's output. They failed. |
I think you are missing the experiences of a large part of the user population. They put together their report, or book, or brochure or datasheet or whatever, and they want it to look a certain way, regardless of the platform, and they almost all use PDF. People care very much about how their work product looks. PDF is a solution that satisfies that constraint - I have seen it do that very consistently for a long time.
How do you annotate blog posts, and in way that is preserved for decades.
I almost suspect we are somehow talking different things, because even the most non-technical users know that about PDFs. But also it reads like you are finding a way to disagree with everything.