On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:45:39 +0100, Lawrence Bell firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On 13/04/18 07:31, Henri Menke wrote:
On Fri, 2018-04-13 at 08:13 +0200, Christoph Reller wrote:
Please, Hans, I kindly ask you to reconsider. I am aware of your opinion and reasoning about this issue. But I believe that for many of us users, today's PDFs need to be both, interactive *and* printable.
If there is any way I can help or motivate you, then please tell me ;-)
The best way to motivate Hans to implement something you need, is by implementing it yourself and sending him updated core files. Works for me every time ;-)
Well, thank you for this hint Henry, but that works only for those who can afford the time :-/
I take it from your reply that fixing this problem with interactivity would likely cause some trouble with the printability? And therefore, it's staying as it is to prioritize printability? That's understandable, but a bit frustrating, since I still don't have any clue what the actual problem is. Could you possibly explain in some more detail or point me to a relevant thread?
(Sorry for changing to bottom posting style.)
This issue is not about a trade-off between print-ability and inter-activeness. If I understand Hans' position correctly, then at least part of his reasoning is the following (please correct me if I'm wrong): It is easy to produce two versions of a document from one common source, one version for print and one for the screen. The former needs no interactive links and the latter should best be viewed fullscreen, i.e., without scrolling, in which case focus=standard is unnecessary. While I largely agree with this approach, many of the ConTeXt users (including myself) are not in a position to decide how their documents should be published. I believe that many of today's PDF documents still are meant to be both, viewed on screen and printed. And it's only for this scenario that focus=standard makes sense.