This comment reads like person who has taken a special case (and even then one that only appears to contradict the "other side", even though it really doesn't)—something like having a 10-K in PDF format—and then constructs an entire (and entirely hypothetical) ideal out of it, just so they can relish in spiting the person they're responding to. It's a crummy way to have a discussion and a crummy interaction to force on other people in general.
> The website you picked -- Berkshire Hathaway's -- is about as much of a "special case" website as exists on the internet.
Only tautologically.
> Also, you do realize the Berkshire Hathaway site's PDF's are especially a lot of long printable documents
In fact, I do realize what the contents of the website I referenced are. Do you have an actual argument for why even in the cases of the printable material, there's any good reason to force people to use the for-print form even when they have no need or desire to print it?
And the site doesn't even fit the characterization here. It certainly has plenty of PDFs made for print, but then it's also filled with stuff like this, which works just as well in HTML as it does as PDF, if not better:
In addition to what crazy-gringo pointed out, I would add that Berkshire did essentially what the article recommends:
>Given PDFs poor usability for online reading, user-experience designers should either avoid using PDFs altogether in favor of presenting content on web pages, or, in cases where a printable PDF is needed, use an HTML gateway page.
