Re: current thoughts on PDF back end

[Michael Piotrowski]

address@hidden (Jeff Kingston) writes:

[...]

> So I'm hypothesising that the best way forward from here would be
> to withdraw the PDF back and end tell people who want PDF to run
> the pipeline
> 
>    lout | ps2pdf
> 
> However I'm not an expert on PDF by any means.  Can those who
> know more about it tell me whether I'm making sense?

I've always felt that it's a better idea to leave the PDF generation
to Distiller or Ghostscript's ps2pdf, for various reasons.  One is
the inclusion of EPS figures, another is font embedding.

Lout's PDF backend (like pdfTeX) is an interesting proof of concept,
but for me it has never been very practical.

-- 
Michael Piotrowski, M.A.                                  <address@hidden>