GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 314683
PDF editor
Last modified: 2017-07-19 18:20:58 UTC
Distribution/Version: fc4 Hi, Just a feature idea. Append, insert, delete editing features for pdf & ps file types (perhaps this is dependent on the back-end?). Regards, Morgan.
I think we decided against editing features (well, except pdf forms). Anyway ccing Bryan.
We're interested in forms support, but not in becoming a pdf editor. Much of the poppler library work could probably be used for creating such a thing, it's just out of our scope.
Thanks for the info - guess I'll look forward to something else. Evince still very nice though. M.
*** Bug 453622 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I think it would be nice to have an application like this, but it should definitely be a different application. It could even share things with evince. Evince is a document viewer, not and editor. In the same way we have applications that are audio and video players and other applications that are audio and video editors.
Hi Carlos, I understand your logic but I don't agree with it for a number of reasons; 1. Most applications are Viewers and Editors of the files they specialize in. I will name a few. Mozilla Firefox, The OpenOffice Suite, Mozilla Thunderbird, All Text Editors, Scribus, etc, etc. The list goes on and on. The great majority of applications are not exclusively viewers. Even in the pdf field, the only reason Adobe makes 2 versons of Acrobat is financial. They can charge a lot of money for a full featured pdf maker and editor - so they do. They give the free viewer to make PDF files the standard (The strategy has worked for them but I don't see why that should dictate everyone else's decisions) 2. Audio and Video production until relatively recently were high end expensive enterprises that required specialised equipment. As it got more mainstream, things changed. Now, many player applications like Cowon Jet Audio have audio recorders and mixing modules built in. Even Winamp has plugins for this. The idea that different kinds of people do production from those that view is old and I believe that in many areas it no longer applies. 3. PDF is THE standard whether we like it or not. Producing and Modifying PDFs is commonly required nowadays by normal desktop users. In other Operating Systems there are commercial and free GUI based applications that do this. In Linux there is PDFTK. That is simply not sustainable. 4. I see no need to go for a full editor immediately or even ever. Most people simply want to be able to move or rotate pages around or delete a page or join some PDF files together. I see it as the difference between The GIMP and GThumb (which has things like rotation and red-eye removal but is no where near as powerful as The GIMP)
(In reply to comment #6) > Hi Carlos, > > I understand your logic but I don't agree with it for a number of reasons; > > 1. Most applications are Viewers and Editors of the files they specialize in. > I will name a few. Mozilla Firefox, The OpenOffice Suite, Mozilla Thunderbird, > All Text Editors, Scribus, etc, etc. The list goes on and on. The great > majority of applications are not exclusively viewers. Even in the pdf field, > the only reason Adobe makes 2 versons of Acrobat is financial. They can charge > a lot of money for a full featured pdf maker and editor - so they do. They > give the free viewer to make PDF files the standard (The strategy has worked > for them but I don't see why that should dictate everyone else's decisions) Well, ok, I'm not saying there aren't applications which are viewers and editors. What I meant is that it's reasonable to have different applications. > 2. Audio and Video production until relatively recently were high end expensive > enterprises that required specialised equipment. As it got more mainstream, > things changed. Now, many player applications like Cowon Jet Audio have audio > recorders and mixing modules built in. Even Winamp has plugins for this. The > idea that different kinds of people do production from those that view is old > and I believe that in many areas it no longer applies. > It was only an example. > 3. PDF is THE standard whether we like it or not. Producing and Modifying PDFs > is commonly required nowadays by normal desktop users. In other Operating > Systems there are commercial and free GUI based applications that do this. In > Linux there is PDFTK. That is simply not sustainable. I agree, but I would like to see a pdf editor instead of adding editor capabilities to evince. There could be some kind of integration between both applications. > 4. I see no need to go for a full editor immediately or even ever. Most people > simply want to be able to move or rotate pages around or delete a page or join > some PDF files together. I see it as the difference between The GIMP and > GThumb (which has things like rotation and red-eye removal but is no where near > as powerful as The GIMP) > Agree, let's write a simple pdf editor then! :-)
*** Bug 746982 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 492352 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***