• mogoh@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      No. It is designed for print. It is used for screens (that’s the crazy part). Something like HTML or epub is designed for screens. PDF later got extended with some features, that only make sense on screen but the original design is for print and it shows. For example everything has a fixed layout size (like paper). And most of the time the order of words got lost so you can not select text in a meaningful way (something that would not matter if it is printed).

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      actually, you’re kinda right! didn’t know this before, but pdf started as a slimmed-down version of postscript that didn’t support all print features.

      • Cypher@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 hours ago

        This is funny. They’re correct.

        Development of PDF began in 1991, when Adobe’s co-founder John Warnock wrote a paper for a project then code-named Camelot, in which he proposed the creation of a simplified version of Adobe’s PostScript format called Interchange PostScript (IPS).[1] Unlike traditional PostScript, which was tightly focused on rendering print jobs to output devices, IPS would be optimized for displaying pages to any screen and any platform.[1]

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_PDF

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          That’s interesting indeed. I knew it was about portability, being right there in the name, but I thought it was about being as compatible everywhere (any device) as possible, then over time also became the defacto way to share a printable document, then that use case waned in popularity since the mid aughts.