Subject: SC22 N2537 - WG9 Request to Add Postscript to Acceptable Distribution Formats - SC22 PLENARY AGENDA ITEM

From: "william c. rinehuls" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 13:26:46 -0400 (EDT)

________________ beginning of title page _________________________
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces
Secretariat:  U.S.A.  (ANSI)

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
N2537

August 1997

SUBJECT:
Request from SC22/WG9 to Add Postscript to List of Acceptable Distribution
Formats

SOURCE:
Secretariat, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22

WORK ITEM:
N/A

STATUS:
This request will be considered at the August 1997 JTC 1/SC22 Plenary
under new agenda item 8.4.4.

CROSS REFERENCE:
N/A

DOCUMENT TYPE:
N/A

ACTION:
To SC22 Member Bodies for review.

Address reply to:
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 Secretariat
William C. Rinehuls
8457 Rushing Creek Court
Springfield, VA 22153 USA
Tel:  +1 (703) 912-9680
Fax:  +1 (703) 912-2973
email:  [email-masked]

______________ end of title page; beginning of text _________________

From: Jim Moore, Convener, SC22/WG9

Subj: Postscript versus PDF

As a part of JTC1's plan to convert to electronic document distribution,  
JTC1 has designated a list of acceptable file formats for document  
distribution.  At the recent meeting of SC22/WG9, we discussed the list  
and generally agreed -- with one exception.  The purpose of this note is
to describe that one area of disagreement and to request the support of
SC22 in seeking a change by JTC1.  We request that the list be changed to  
add PostScript.

Postscript and PDF are intended for slightly different purposes.
Postscript is already the de facto standard for portable printing; Adobe  
is positioning PDF as the de facto standard for portable, on-line document  
distribution.  Their characteristics overl ap in some useful areas:
- Both permit the distribution of documents in a non-revisable format.
- Both retain the integrity of pagination in the distributed form.  (This  
is not an inherent property of PostScript but is generally true as  
implemented.)
- Both can be readily viewed and printed on a wide variety of platforms  
via readers that are available for free.

For the use intended by JTC1, Postscript has an important advantage over  
PDF.  Virtually all document or word processing systems are able to  
produce PostScript documents. One simply uses a PostScript printer driver  
with its output directed to a file rather than a device. Few systems, if  
any, support the direct production of PDF. Instead, the output document  
(ironically, often in Postscript form) must be converted to PDF by the  
use of a program which must be purchased. The price of the program is  
between $200 and $300 US.

Apparently, those who prefer PDF make this preference because of a view  
that variabilities among PostScript versions hamper portability. Until  
recently, I believed this myself. I have now verified, though, the  
availablity and usability of two software programs, GhostScript and  
GhostView, that permit the easy handling of all varieties of PostScript  
documents on a wide variety of platforms, including Unix, MacIntosh, and  
PC (including Windows 3.1 and 95). The utilities permit one to view  
PostScript documents in paginated form and to print them -- even on  
non-PostScript printers. The utilities are available for free -- they  are
free software, not shareware -- and they have been successfully used by  
many different users in different environments.

With the availability of these utilities, it would be inappropriate to  
force project editors to purchase special purpose tools at significant  
expense.

Therefore, WG9 requests the support of SC22 in requesting that Postscript  
be added to the list of acceptable distribution formats.

Regards, Jim Moore
___________________ end of SC22 N2537 ______________________________