Latest: Leonard Rosenthol has since posted a followup on the discussion.
PDFSAGE wondered what the cons are with PDF/A compared to simple HTML for document archival. The debate generally comes down to what you think a document is. If it's an A4 page for printing, you probably want PDF. If a document is an arbitrary unit of information, I would suggest HTML.
You can't just assume people have a PDF viewer installed. Hence PDFSAGE shared his PDF document assuming I had Flash installed. Another proprietary tool. Great, what a start!
Cons of PDF/A
- The PDF viewer isn't nearly as pervasive as a Web browser. Is there a PDF viewer on your mobile? No, I thought not.
- The PDF viewer is slower than a Web browser.
- A PDF is many times larger than an HTML file. Imagine Wikipedia as a PDF/A file? That would be CRAZY.
- Since the viewer and content are much larger than HTML counterparts, PDF/A demands a faster internet connection. Have a slow connection? You're out of luck!
- PDF isn't part of the Web. It's non-trivial to get PDF content on the Web. People end up converting it into a PNG and that's a terrible loss of information.
- It's non-trivial to index and parse out information from a PDF
- "Protected PDFs" break common computing paradigms of copying&pasting
- It's non-trivial to edit content in a PDF. Indeed, PDFs are often designed to be static for archival and reproducible results. Though if information can't be maintained, one can argue it's dead.
- Only accurate representations of stored content can be produced if you embed the font. Bloat!
- A document is of little use unless it's transcribed into text. Scan a STASI file into a PDF. Great, now what? Storing it as a PNG would be even better as people would at least been able to view it easier.
- PDF has a poor accessibility record
- Non-trivial to diff, track, merge and compare PDF documents
- An open standard? That you need to pay ISO 200GBP for?! Are there at least two interoperable implementations of PDF/A?
- Probably only one conforming implementation (Guess who!). Is there a test suite or validator? No
- Not as secure as Web technologies
- OMG WTF PDF
Pros of HTML
- You can read HTML in the simplest of text editors
- An algorithm for parsing HTML is openly defined
- You can "sign" an HTML file by using XML digital signatures. Widgets in fact use a subset called Widgets 1.0: Digital Signatures.
- Scalable. Want text on big or small? Sure thing.
- Easy to edit and maintain. Anyone can edit HTML with a plethora of tools and support.
- Simple to index, find and use the information marked up within an HTML file. Same is not true of a PDF.
- HTML is space efficient. PDF isn't.
- HTML can include "marginalia" like comments and notes.
- HTML has several ways of adding metadata support, though Google search generally does not rely on them for best results
- HTML can convey critical information. It's done so more effectively that PDF has ever done.
- Need to package some HTML content? (i.e. self-containment) Use a widget!
- You can generate static snapshots of HTML to formats like PDF, with tools like Prince. You can't do the reverse very easily!
- HTML is already the primary medium for archival of information! Checkout the waybackmachine
- Worried about data being tampered with? Mandate source control like git where each document can be explicitly tracked since HTML can be treated as plain text for this purpose.