Talk:Comparison of OpenXPS and PDF
|This page was nominated for deletion on 12 July 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.|
|This article was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.|
|WikiProject Computing / Software||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Errors in PDF column
The PDF column has numerous errors. I am not sure how best to fix them and since I have serious doubts about the value of this article I'm not going to try right now. Here goes:
- "Langage Type: Subset of PostScript page description programming language". This is false. The PDF language has roots in PostScript but it is not at all a subset. If it were, then you would be able to execute all PDF files in a PostScript interpreter.
- I took this from Portable Document Format#Technical foundations. If you have a reference that confirms that PDF does use the full PostScript programming language, then please correct the article and add that reference. I'm going to add more references for the rest of the article ASAP. Thanks. Ghettoblaster (talk) 23:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- The referenced statement is that PDF "combines three technologies" of which one is "a subset of PostScript". That is true. That does not make PDF itself a subset of PostScript. It means it incorporated parts of PostScript in its original design. There is much, much more to the PDF language than that. Mrhsj (talk) 03:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
- "Full file content compression: Compression at page level only". First I have no idea why "full file" vs "page level" is even interesting: what is interesting is how the file sizes compare for comparable content. But in any case it is not true to say PDF only has "compression at page level." All the non-stream objects in the whole file can be put into a stream and compressed as a unit.
- "Multiple documents in one file: No". False. Multiple documents can be placed in the PDF file using the file attachment mechanism.
- "Alpha channel in color definitions: no". Misleading at best. PDF supports full vector transparency. Syntactically it's expressed by putting alpha in the graphics state rather than the setcolor operator but that is functionally equivalent.
- "Change Tracking: No". Debatable, depending on what you mean by change tracking. If a PDF is modified entirely via incremental updates, the entire history of the file can be recovered programmatically. In practice, I believe this is rarely done.
Also, claiming that PDF doesn't support TIFF is incorrect. It is the uncompressed basis for images in the PDF the format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:29, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- Adobe introduced the XML Data Package in 2003. To-date, this is used as an XML form generator. The point being that PDF does have XML capabilites to some degree (although not natively).220.127.116.11 (talk) 05:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
- Well, most of it is easy to check via the linked standard specifications. I'm going to add more references ASAP as mentioned above. Ghettoblaster (talk) 23:51, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
The article states "The different goals in the development of OpenXPS and PDF resulted in different principles and design tradeoffs between the file formats.". It would be nice if the article actually said what these different development goals are; I can't really tell from the table. -IByte (talk) 00:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
+2 to this, especially since it is not backed by any references....where is this coming from? How does anyone know they had different design goals? Perhaps a guy at MS just didn't like Adobe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 13:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
PDF feature check list here is rather shortened
The lack of all these features in the table makes the two formats look very similar.