Re: How are Windows users supposed to print the PostScript refcards?

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

>>> How about deleting the postscript files and replacing them with the
>>> pdfs?
>> 
>> Note sure which part of your answer was ironic :-) Seriously, adding PDF
>> is an idea we can consider ; AFAIK /normal/ people tend to use PDF over
>>  PS. Is deleting PS files such a harm ?

> I think adding *.pdf is fine (only ~ 1 MB) for a real benefit of many
> users.  I didn't suggest to remove the PS versions, because on typical
> GNU/Linux systems, the PDF would be converted to PS during the
> printing process (e.g. with CUPS filters) so I'd rather keep the PS
> files.  If size disk space is important, we may gzip the PS files like
> we do for *.el.  Older Unix or GNU/Linux systems might not even be
> able to print PDF while they can handle PS fine.

PS files can be generated just fine on those older systems.  And given that
on OT1H xpdf has worked fine for many years now, and OTOH PDFs are
sufficiently widespread that anyone whose system can't print PDFs will have
encountered many other more serious problems, I think that removing PS is
very reasonable.

PDF can be rendered faster than PS, is generally safer than PS (by virtue
of not being Turing-complete), is generally smaller as well, and can be
handled (e.g. searched) more easily.

The only downside I know of PDFs is that the tools to manipulate them
(e.g. put them in 2up or copy/paste some part of it) are rather lacking
in the Free Software world.


        Stefan