Why a PDF? The PDF is just pictures of things that link to an external site (Thingverse, various blogs, etc) where you find the actual instructions. The PDF itself doesn't contain instructions at all - just an index/catalog, really.
It is, but the UX trying to read a A4/letter sized PDF document on a phone is absolutely horrible.
I don't know much about steel coils, and I'm hoping that something that fits in your back seat isn't as dangerous as those featured in YouTube videos, but the idea that the primary concern is just strapping the thing down is kinda funny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC6pn8n7MeY
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kDGfk-dOjq8
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=steel+coil+unwi...
So no, that's not the same type of complaint
You can make a phone-sized PDF and it'll be just fine.
it's not the file format.
It's pretty cool how PDFs don't typically load resources from an external website or CDN. They are self-contained, and thus demonstrably portable.
Gross analogy: Have you ever been to a multi-day music festival? A port-o-potty in the dark is disgusting, but still somewhat useable compared the alternative of going to the bathroom in public. PDF artifacts are in the same ballpark.
Was at a restaurant with a QR code that led to a PDF if their paper menu. It was horrible. For reference it was the Ralph Lauren Cafe in Omotesando Tokyo.
All that, VS a PDF that shows the entire menu that I can navigate spatially, show as much as I want depending on light levels, interest, and screen size, and can all fit in one, static tab.
Of course, the real answer is that electronic menus at sit down restaurants opened with QR codes are trash. Paper never really had these problems unless the restaurant was bad at menu design. I dislike being forced to use my phone at all when I'm out with friends or family for a nice dinner. Growing up, if I used my phone at the dinner table I would've been scolded.
If it's PDF or nothing, I'll be glad to take the PDF.
The PDF format can’t necessarily be blamed for its inability to be responsive to screen size, but that’s one of several good reasons to discourage the use of PDFs for purely digital documents. Its design is linked to a specific historical context, and it should be limited to that context.
(Of course, I imagine the actual reason for the PDF is that it’s just an export of the InDesign/Photoshop/whatever file that was used to create the original paper menus. There probably is no “database.”)
Easily? Because it's not a fraction of the work. Let's just assume you mean to use someone else's solution (of the literal thousands, each with their own quirks), to make your bespoke website.
PDFs have a standard. Libraries to resize are not difficult to find. Most people are able to run a PDF through their printer driver for a resize, because it's a solved problem.
I would say creating a job that outputs a bunch of PDFs is going to be easier than a build system for different devices (CMS or not), every time.
The two main pain points everyone said PDF had solved for documents, when it was introduced.
I expect that whatever was used to create the PDF could be configured to produce a website...
I'm actually surprised by the anti-PDF sentiment here (in general case, not necessarily this book). Modern web is so bad, that almost every day I end up on some page that would be strictly better if it were a PDF. So, to play devil's advocate, PDFs are cool because:
- The links may rot, but they remain, and so does surrounding content. Once you get a PDF, no one can take it away from you.
- It's self-contained. It can easily be transferred between devices and read without an Internet connection.
- It's a file. Yes, it's important to mention because in 2024, files cannot be taken for granted.
- Rich format without spurious dynamics and other web nonsense. Sure, PDFs technically can run arbitrary JavaScript, but hardly any reader supports that.
- Can't track you or spy on you (theoretically it could, in practice, see previous point).
I could come up with a few more. Point being, you could do worse, and modern web quite often is worse.
As for what could be an even better format, my mind is drawn towards CHM[0]. You know, like the help files in old Windows software. A self-contained file built of interlinked HTML pages, complete with index and internal search/xref. Kind of a better EPUB[1].
(Ironically, marketers should actually love PDF - total control over presentation is exactly what they've been trying to gain on the web all these years.)
--
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Compiled_HTML_Help
[1] - Despite being a decade older.
a) it cannot be automatically reflowed
b) it’s a complete mess of a file format with tech deb spanning 30 years
c) the linked ressources info
Everything else is fine with it and apparently lotta folks write plenty of software to read it.
Perhaps epubs (and .mobi etc) come close but they are not universally adopted
- It's self-contained. It can easily be transferred between devices and read without an Internet connection. - It's a file. Yes, it's important to mention because in 2024, files cannot be taken for granted.
(Btw it’s a sad state of affairs that we can less and less own our files)
But I do think in the post here, the issue is that the PDF in itself is pretty useless : it doesn’t contain any information and only links to … websites.
(Btw I wouldn’t criticize this a lot because I’m admirative of the indexation work, it’s pretty cool !)
”For each entry in this PDF, follow the link and give a structured explanation of how to make the thing."
I don't know if any off-the-shelf tool is capable of that today though.