TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Online Formats WAS Disabling Print From:Sandra Charker <scharker -at- connectives -dot- com> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com Date:Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:55:02 +1100
We've had speculation about why users preferred HTML to PDF, but Is there
data? Jessica - did you ask them? did they tell you?
Not to add to the speculation (much), but most of the discussions about
formats that we have here seems to compare reading online with reading from
print. I'd like to ask about your preferences, if any, between online formats.
Preamble:
I find PDF blurry. I find it tiring and uncomfortable, and I have far more
difficulty concentrating on the material when it's in PDF than I do when
it's in HTML. I don't know if I'm unique, in a minority, or part of a
silent majority. So I thought I'd ask here...
Questions:
1. Do you notice a difference between reading PDF online and reading HTML
online?
2. Do you have a preference either way? If so, which one?
Short answers might be best sent directly to me and I'll summarise them.
Explanations:
I'm less interested in reasons for my discomfort than I am in establishing
the existence or otherwise of a general problem. User preference would only
be one part of a general problem, of course. Even if it's true that a large
number of people dislike / avoid / notice PDF online, that doesn't
necessarily mean that they comprehend or remember it less than other online
formats. Suggestive though.
I've been told at various times that there's something wrong with my
monitors (must have been blurry on over 2 dozen monitors at 4 resolutions
by now), my eyes (clever of them to identify file formats like that), that
it's all in my imagination (possible), that it's poor choice of fonts (also
possible, but I've never seen a clear one). Those explanations all assume
that the problem is me (possible, but *highly improbable <g>).
I think the most likely reason is that PDF is just too good for online:
screen resolutions still can't cope with those smooth curves. But if that's
so why don't more people have difficulty with it? And why would people on
this list who usually demonstrate a strong interest in helping people find
and retain information recommend a format if there's objective evidence
that it's counter-productive.
I've also wondered if it's possible that power supplies have some effect.
This seems bizarre (especially if you're working on a laptop), but I have
been told that the ancient CGA standard was readable in the US instead of
the indistinguishable insult that it was where I saw it. If anyone has read
PDFs (preferably the same document) in north America and elsewhere in the
world, it would be interesting to know if you noticed any difference.