Re: The PDF back end

[Kyle]

address@hidden wrote:

> As Jeff said, the problem is that Lout depends too much on the
> PostScript programming language.  Perhaps now is the time to
> start transitioning to a new model, where there is no direct
> connection between the Lout system and the final output format.
> This should be done in small, testable steps so that the
> transition can happen gradually and without breaking anything.

Why transition away from the most powerful and most widely accepted graphical
scripting language in the world?  Why reinvent the wheel?

Even if the eventual "standard" output is PDF, I still favor using postscript 
(i.e.
a powerful, well tested, graphical programming language) as the means to that 
end
rather than some non-standard, cooked-up, intermediary graphical description
language.

>
> Re: Postscript: I have nothing against PS as a language. I simply
> believe that it is overkill for a page description format. Why on
> earth would I want a file format that can print one way on
> mondays, and another way the rest of the week?
>

This has not been my experience at all.

kyle.vcf
Description: Card for Kyle