> I think it would strategically make sense if they developed an XML
> version of PDF. It seems to me that currently XPS has a kind of
> monopoly in that field, and I wouldn't be too certain it won't eat
> any of PDF's market share. As far as I know, XPS is more or less
> home-brewn Microsoft technology. PDFXML is based on well
> standards (SVG, PDF, OpenType, ICC, PNG and JPEG), so in my eyes
> would make it far superior.
yes, certainly. But as far as I know Adobe, they will push their own
XML/Flash/Flex standard because they want to be in control of
> > Other companies and open source projects are now supporting SVG:
> Inkscape, Opera,
> > Webkit, Trolltech/QT, Mozilla, Google,
> But are there any real life uses of SVG as a multi page print
> format? I know there is the SVG print draft, but are there viewers
> (or other SVG applications) that support multi page SVG documents?
no - they only printing workflow involving SVG that works currently
is SVG in conjunction with XSL-FO. But it delivers to PDF, or
multiple SVG files (one file per page). Most XSL-FO processors
support SVG as an input format and some as an output format.
> > please don't forget that many people have other
> > PDF readers installed (Mac Preview, Okular/Document Viewer on
> etc.) - those are
> > very good PDF readers but not from Adobe and probably not
> implementing most of the
> > Adobe specific PDF extensions.
> That's certainly true. I myself use a number of different PDF
> viewers. I wouldn't rely on PDFXML being supported by other PDF
> viewers than Adobe Reader. For distribution, the files can be
> converted to traditional PDF. But I think that the format has the
> potential and Adobe would have the necessary weight to establish it
> the market (if they only wanted).
yes - if they wanted.