D&C GLug - Home Page

[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] Well, that's a bit disappointing....

 


On Dec 6, 2012 7:41 AM, "tom" <tompotts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 05/12/12 16:59, Simon Avery wrote:
>>
>> On 5 December 2012 10:21, paul sutton <zleap@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> a) act as proof of ID
>>> b) that you have consented to checks being carried out
>>> Its not the clubs fault,  its the people further up.
>>
>> This is very common.
>>
>> I once recently encountered a firm where this was the practice. Once
>> it was signed and waved in front of the MD, the accounts people then
>> scanned it back in for archive, shredding the dead tree version.
>>
>> Quite a few people are now scanning and PDFing paper docs, it's
>> something I've been looking at for work too.
>>
> But why PDF them - that’s merely an pointless wrapper on around an image or images. It makes it harder to use - the image(s) can simply be embedded in a web page while the PDF requires a bug ridden reader and individual pages cant be individually referenced.
>
> Tom te tom te tom

To which bug ridden reader are you referring? Evince? XPDF? Are you sure that you want to /imply/ that an image viewer, or web browser in your example, is not bug ridden? I'm sure we could all point to one very well known and buggy web browser, and I'm sure there have been a few potential security problems relating to both JPEG and PNG in recent years.

Grant

-- 
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq