More from the Weinberger blog. (I’m still catching up on my feeds after my trip South, OK!) He’s actually commenting on something else, but his throwaway comment about PDFs is spot-on:

Just a generic whine: The report is a PDF. Why oh why? Is there a format more hostile to on-screen reading?* This corporate infatuation with PDF is one of the great Not Getting It’s of the age.

I agree, partly because, as he says, it’s a very poor choice for on-screen reading due to lack of re-flow capability. But also because search engines tend not to be able to include PDF attachment text in their searches. Outlook and Traction would be two examples of this. [Correction: As Jordan points out in the comments, Traction does in fact support searching of PDFs when combined with the FAST engine.] I always encourage my Traction posters to put the full content in the body of the article, not as a PDF or Word doc attachment, so that it is included in site-wide searches. But because so many NHS authorities issue stuff in PDF, more often than not it’s easier for posters to simply upload it as an attachment. Very frustrating.

The main subject of Weinberger’s post may also be worth looking at, but right now I just don’t have time to read a 70-page report…

Tags: ,