Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > PDF documents

Reply
Thread Tools

PDF documents

 
 
Matty F
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2006
Bruce Sinclair wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "impossible" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> (snip)
>
>>>If the output can be seen on screen, then it can be printed. Same
>>>applys to
>>>putting content in th clipboard.

>>
>>Sorry -- until I see some implementation of this theory, I'm going to
>>remain a skeptic.

>
>
> alt-print screen. Paste into word (or similar). print. Worste case
> and ugly perhaps ... but that will get it printed


I've done a Print Screen and fed that into Textbridge to convert
it to plain text. I can do anything I want with that.
But I shouldn't have to do that conversion and nor should anyone
else have to. The point I am trying to make is, why is a
Government Department restricting the copying of a huge document
that they are inviting us to comment on?
Are they stupid, or don't they really want anyone to comment on it?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2006

"Bruce Sinclair" <(E-Mail Removed) >
wrote in message news:2nGVf.8797$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> "impossible" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> (snip)
>>> If the output can be seen on screen, then it can be printed. Same
>>> applys to
>>> putting content in th clipboard.

>>
>>Sorry -- until I see some implementation of this theory, I'm going
>>to
>>remain a skeptic.

>
> alt-print screen. Paste into word (or similar). print. Worste case
> and ugly perhaps ... but that will get it printed
>


Ok, this borders on the pedantic. The Print-Screen function does not
interact with the document at all but simply prints whatever is
displayed on the screen. Nice try


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2006
In article <EJGVf.8804$(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "impossible"

> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> (snip)
>>
>>>>If the output can be seen on screen, then it can be printed. Same
>>>>applys to
>>>>putting content in th clipboard.
>>>
>>>Sorry -- until I see some implementation of this theory, I'm going to
>>>remain a skeptic.


>> alt-print screen. Paste into word (or similar). print. Worste case
>> and ugly perhaps ... but that will get it printed

>
>I've done a Print Screen and fed that into Textbridge to convert
>it to plain text. I can do anything I want with that.
>But I shouldn't have to do that conversion and nor should anyone
>else have to.


Agreed.

> The point I am trying to make is, why is a
>Government Department restricting the copying of a huge document
>that they are inviting us to comment on?
>Are they stupid, or don't they really want anyone to comment on it?


Never ascribe to conspiracy what may be adequately described by cock up

Bruce

----------------------------------------
I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "impossible" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>"Bruce Sinclair" <(E-Mail Removed) >
>wrote in message news:2nGVf.8797$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> "impossible" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> (snip)
>>>> If the output can be seen on screen, then it can be printed. Same
>>>> applys to
>>>> putting content in th clipboard.
>>>
>>>Sorry -- until I see some implementation of this theory, I'm going
>>>to
>>>remain a skeptic.

>>
>> alt-print screen. Paste into word (or similar). print. Worste case
>> and ugly perhaps ... but that will get it printed
>>

>Ok, this borders on the pedantic. The Print-Screen function does not
>interact with the document at all but simply prints whatever is
>displayed on the screen. Nice try


No mention was made of interacting with the document ... they said " If the
output can be seen on screen, then it can be printed" ... which this
achieves. If it is possible, then the statement is true. Pedantic away



Bruce

----------------------------------------
I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jerry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2006
impossible wrote:
> "Bruce Sinclair" <(E-Mail Removed) >
> wrote in message news:2nGVf.8797$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>"impossible" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>(snip)
>>
>>>>If the output can be seen on screen, then it can be printed. Same
>>>>applys to
>>>>putting content in th clipboard.
>>>
>>>Sorry -- until I see some implementation of this theory, I'm going
>>>to
>>>remain a skeptic.

>>
>>alt-print screen. Paste into word (or similar). print. Worste case
>>and ugly perhaps ... but that will get it printed
>>

>
>
> Ok, this borders on the pedantic. The Print-Screen function does not
> interact with the document at all but simply prints whatever is
> displayed on the screen. Nice try
>
>

Can I play the pedantic game? The print screen doesn't print anything,
it merely copies it to the clipboard
 
Reply With Quote
 
Matty F
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2006
Bruce Sinclair wrote:

> In article <EJGVf.8804$(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>>The point I am trying to make is, why is a
>>Government Department restricting the copying of a huge document
>>that they are inviting us to comment on?
>>Are they stupid, or don't they really want anyone to comment on it?

>
>
> Never ascribe to conspiracy what may be adequately described by cock up


You can all relax. It is now possible to cut and paste from all
the documents. It seems they were changed this morning.
There, that wasn't so hard was it?


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-02-2006
In article <ttOWf.9660$(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>> In article <EJGVf.8804$(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F

> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>>The point I am trying to make is, why is a
>>>Government Department restricting the copying of a huge document
>>>that they are inviting us to comment on?
>>>Are they stupid, or don't they really want anyone to comment on it?


>> Never ascribe to conspiracy what may be adequately described by cock up

>
>You can all relax. It is now possible to cut and paste from all
>the documents. It seems they were changed this morning.
>There, that wasn't so hard was it?


So ... does that mean it was a cock up ... or a really really devious
conspiracy ?


Bruce

----------------------------------------
I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Matty F
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-03-2006
Bruce Sinclair wrote:

> In article <ttOWf.9660$(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>>
>>>In article <EJGVf.8804$(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F

>>
>><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>The point I am trying to make is, why is a
>>>>Government Department restricting the copying of a huge document
>>>>that they are inviting us to comment on?
>>>>Are they stupid, or don't they really want anyone to comment on it?

>
>
>>>Never ascribe to conspiracy what may be adequately described by cock up

>>
>>You can all relax. It is now possible to cut and paste from all
>>the documents. It seems they were changed this morning.
>>There, that wasn't so hard was it?

>
>
> So ... does that mean it was a cock up ... or a really really devious
> conspiracy ?


Of course it was a cock up. It makes me wonder about the quality
of the report. These are the guys who want to install equipment
that can charge us $30 to $50 per week, somewhat like a speed
camera that takes a pic of every car. And they can't even make
the settings of a PDF document correct.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Postscript to PDF with pdf-tools, pdf-writer, or other Sean Nakasone Ruby 1 04-14-2008 09:13 PM
PDF::Writer, create pdf and insert in other pdf file. Ricardo Pog Ruby 1 03-26-2008 08:24 PM
No more stuff on C:\Documents and Settings\[User]\My Documents\Visual Studio 2005\ craigkenisston@hotmail.com ASP .Net 1 10-18-2006 03:31 PM
Re: Showing PDF documents from a SQL Database dave wanta ASP .Net 0 07-03-2003 02:33 AM



Advertisments