Veering away from XPS this week, I’ve got the next posting in the ABCs series for you. It’s been a while, but here it is. This week, it’s about the history, the mechanics and the product. A little vague? What does this have to do with the PDF?, you ask. Read on.


GUI

From creation to manipulation and accessibility to view-ability, the GUI’s function is crucial to working with PDFs. Yet have you ever wondered about the history behind the interface you use? The first rough idea of a GUI was conceived of by American engineer, Vannevar Bush (1890-1974) in the early 1930s. In his essay “As We May Think”, published in 1945, Bush describes a device he called the "Memex" that would transform physical gestures into technical commands. A user could call up and display multiple “book” files on a desktop screen and jump through pages of content with the movement of one’s hand. Yet, it was only theorized about until Douglas Engelbart (1925- ), inspired by Bush’s idea, decided to develop and implement the idea into a prototype. In 1968, the first working GUI was demonstrated.

The first marketable GUI using computer was invented by Xerox PARC in 1973 with the Xerox Alto computer. It was further enhanced by Apple’s revolutionary Apple Lisa PC ten years later in 1983. And by the 1990’s, the GUI of Microsoft’s Windows OS improved the functioning of the GUI into the one you know today. Of course, the interface has also been developed and used by a number of individual computer companies over the years, and it has come a long way in terms of looks and usage.

The goal for the GUI nowadays is to provide the most functionality within the least amount of space. And Adobe Reader 8 is just one example in its simplicity. Perhaps in the future our PDF viewers will do away with the GUI altogether, and use virtual reality as a way of “handling” PDF documents!


Hash function

So far, we’ve made it so that electronic docs would be an easy way of storing and recording data. In addition, it prevents data from being physically lost or stolen-- invisible and intangible until opened and printed. Yet, that also means that security has transferred from playing a physical role to a digital one. And just as you need a sense of security when physically locking doors, you also need it when securing electronic documents.

You already know that information security is important to the PDF and can be done with the click of a mouse. Yet, one of the things behind that simple move is something called a Hash function . Hash functions or algorithms play a role in creating a digital signature which you’ve undoubtedly used in the past to secure your PDFs. It is that digital signature which is made up of a hash and encryption key.

A textual message or document is made into a smaller data version of itself through a “hashing” process. When this happens, the content of the message is encoded, using a hash function. The hashed version of the message is called a message digest, which is, in turn, encrypted with the author’s private key. The resulting encryption of the message digest is the digital signature that you attach to the original PDF Document. All of this is done behind that one deceptive click.

And although the term “hash” may seem a funny word to refer to a security/encryption element, according to definition sources, it caught on in the 1960’s because it described the way in which hashing algorithms work—they “chop and mix” up the data being secured.


Investintech

The ever changing nature of the electronic world is not a new concept. Software and gadgets continually evolve within the fast paced environment of technological innovation. And Investintech has also been caught up in that forward momentum with the recent release of Sonic PDF Creator v.2.0. And, with its more-advanced-than-v.1.2 features (support for more formats, document toolkits and formatting capabilities), you can now create better PDF documents than you did before.

Of course, we’ll aim to surpass this 2.0 version in the future as well and continue to push the PDF creation envelope. It’s just a matter of checking in frequently to see what new creation features we’ll have in store!



“Til next time. Stay tuned!

You can’t deny that when it comes down to tech business, all moves are a competitive one. You need to get in on the market, follow the trends, keep your eye on the prize, predict all consequences, and all this in the shadow of your competitors. And so, when it comes to PDF business, the competition to either emulate or dominate is Adobe. And MS, at least on the XPS side, is attempting just that.


The Adoption of XPS: User requirements


You’ve seen the affect XPS has already had on one format, the ODF. That affect was mainly on the interoperability level. The competition with Adobe, however, will occur mostly on the usership level where end-users, developers, and vendors will play a role. How the PDF de facto status will fare out against the mainstream popularity of MS will be decided by how well the XPS platform (the platform of software that supports creation, use and manipulation of XPS) will meet those different user needs.


Specific document functionality, support for security, compatible hardware and software, client and server options, workflow accommodation—all are what potential end users will look for. For developers, the question becomes: what can be done with the XPS Reference? Does it have the practicality and ease for working with its APIs and SDKs? Vendors, on the other hand, will be looking to see if there is a good market out there, a tech need that will take up the XPS format.


And integrating XPS into the Windows Platform is one of the key factors to making that market happen. Microsoft’s actions are aimed at providing not only a printing document format, but also a document workflow. On the marketing side of things, popularity can make XPS a convenient choice.


The Adobe Factor


Yet for every action there is a reaction. The tech world is no stranger to this concept, especially Adobe these days. XML , in general, is the growing trend for administration workflows right now. And with the Mars document, Adobe’s XML-based representation of PDF, another layer of convenience is added for their own Acrobat and Reader users. Their eye is on the future too.


Yet, aside from the competition with the ISO approval for OOXML, Adobe is also seeing competition with itself. When the PDF 1.7 spec gets its ISO certification, changes will have to be made in software already being used for PDF files. How will pre-ISO PDF files be handled as opposed to post-ISO PDF files? This also means changes for third party vendors-- their products, their market and their projects. There’ll be a ripple to accommodate the adjustments, but just how big?


The breadth and reach of the PDF has successfully met the needs of advanced and specific workflows in the past. With the growing digital industry, many hardcopies have already been converted to PDF. The standardized subsets have contributed a huge part to that end— the archiving PDF especially. The push for PDF standardization has been in the back of AIIM and Adobe’s mind since 1995. In other words, years of planning and service aren’t outdone over night. And as time has proven to be Adobe’s defense thus far, it now seems to be a strategic offense.


Does Conversion = Co-Existence?


Of course, two kinds of formats (and users) can co-exist. And as a PDF user, quality conversion is important. For the ODF user, it meant a translator plug in that worked with its competitor. And that’s what it’ll ultimately mean for the PDF user, XPS user and every other user for that matter too—another format to convert. Ironically, it just may become a matter of who can co-exist better.

In last week’s posting, I ended with a question about the implications of integrating XPS documents into workflows. And, although still very early in the game, you can see, by the vast amount of news (and rants and raves), the affect the new format is beginning to have. What has the reception been like so far? One word: Controversial.


Behind The XPS (XML Paper Specification) Format

To get behind all the controversy, I guess you’d have to get behind the format. In brief, the XML Paper Specification describes what is known as an XPS document, a file format for representing electronic paper using an XML-based language. The XML technology used to make XPS documents possible is OOXML (Office Open Extensible Markup Language).


OOXML As An ISO Standard?

OOXML was essentially developed by Microsoft, and produced to be used in conjunction with Microsoft applications. It was submitted to Ecma International back in 2005, where it gained approval from the organization in December 2006. Ecma then submitted it to ISO where it’s currently nearing the end of its evaluation process. It’s the potential standardization of OOXML that has generated the controversy surrounding the XPS document format. And the controversy raises important points when looking at the integration of XPS documents into the PDF industry.


ODF In The News: Things To Consider

If you think there aren’t enough acronyms in the tech world, you can add another one into the alphabet soup that is our digital swimming hole: ODF. As an XML-based format, the OpenDocument Format is already an ISO standard and a well known competitor to Microsoft’s Office suite. It was legislated as the default document format by the state of Massachusetts and implemented state wide just last month. This means a whole constituency would be (and is) using a document format that wasn’t supported by the giant known as Microsoft.


But, after an 8 month project, version 1.0 of an ODF-OOXML translation plug-in was just released last week. The plug-in allows ODF documents to be opened, worked on and saved as ODF within MS Office applications. It was published, not developed, by Microsoft and made available via SourceForge.net. Just one example of how Microsoft is pushing its interoperability campaign, no?


And when it comes to XML, the portability and universality is due to the way in which XML specifically describes only the content of your data. Yet, the Office Open XML used in XPS documents is, at its core, influenced by Microsoft’s tech design; that “limits” the openness of it. The OOXML is a container format for XML-based markup languages that reference the individual applications of the MS Office suite. No surprise, but when you’re trying to standardize such a thing, it might make it difficult to win end users over.


So just how open such a standardized (MS) format can be has yet to be proven over time. However, with the release of MS Office 2007 and Vista with their XPS functions, the OOXML factor, standardized or not, isn’t going to leave the picture anytime soon.


But, sitting on the sidelines of the heated rivalry between ODF and OOXML, is Adobe, the third party member in this portable document arena. Armed with a long established usership in one hand and an (almost) ISO standard in the other, what competitive battle will it see?

Head lines, strategy and competition. That seems to be the theme of the week as the tech news headlines of this week are, indeed, interesting, exciting and big.

Headlines Aglow!

First one to come out this week concerned Adobe. The PDF proprietor announced, on Monday, its decision to release the PDF 1.7 specification to the International Standards Organization (ISO) via the Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM) working group. Taking a major step, Adobe strategically plans on changing the format’s de facto standard status to that of an ISO standard.

Second major headline in the news is the consumer release of Microsoft’s Vista Operating System and Office 2007 on Tuesday at 12:01 am. This is also big as Vista, successor to Windows XP, will undoubtedly raise the bar even higher when it comes to the innovation of desktop computer software and the PC industry.

When Worlds Collide There Is A Strategy

However, behind the great news, one can’t help but read between the (head)lines. For instance, one Vista innovation that concerns the PDF corner of the universe is the native XPS functionality. XPS documents are representations of paper documents described by an XML-based language, which look and act very much like PDF documents in nature.

The question on everyone’s mind: “What influence will it have in the PDF industry?” Let’s take a brief look at the main factors.

Well, just like the PDF, XPS is an open standard, which invites third-party development. This use of Open XML technology gives Microsoft the opportunity to level that contribution/participation playing field on which the PDF has been dominant.

Another thing to mention is the fact that Microsoft is proprietor and developer of widely used software suites, making the distribution of that functionality on every PC a simple thing. XPS ubiquity wouldn’t be too hard to imagine.

XPS is also device independent on the platform level, yet handy at the doc application level. With that added convenience, the interoperability envelope is pushed one more inch.

The question, I guess, is now begging to be answered. And it seems as if it’s being responded to. . . .

Adobe’s push to make the PDF an open standard comes years after the format’s establishment, and just before the release of Vista—the OS toting support for its flagship’s alternative.

And yet, let’s not forget that Adobe has also been at work with XML, developing, not the XPS, but, the Mars document. . . .

Thus far, as a de facto standard, the PDF has been under a broad range of third party development and innovation from PDF software companies. Despite tools, viewers and converters, though, Adobe has always controlled the PDF specification. Standardizing it will, in a sense, put them slightly out of the driver’s seat as ISO will make refinements and changes to the format’s nature.

However, keep in mind, several of the PDF’s subsets (PDF/A, PDF/X and PDF/E) are already ISO approved standards, or in the process of becoming one. In addition, two other subsets have been added to the list and are also in the works. These standards are implemented and followed as industry requirements. By submitting the PDF 1.7 spec to ISO, Adobe solidifies and elevates the PDF’s “de facto”, usage-based status into the same official standards category as its subsets.

Hmmm. . . .

Competition Still Stirring?

In June, the anti-trust legal dispute over XPS began a small blip on the Microsoft-Adobe radar that consistently beeped the countdown to R-Day (Release Day) ever since. It seems a bit bigger than a blip now, doesn’t it?

Yet, with these big giant leaps for all user-kind, there seems to be something more behind that velvet curtain than we first assumed, something with bigger questions now at stake: How will both these developments affect established workflows? What does this mean for the PDF user?