I get it, but I thing betting on either is still the wrong horse
HTML is more often done wrong then right, and even when it is done right, dies of compatibility drift, link rot, and the inevitable site wide wipes every few years whenever a new person takes over. Even permalinks wind up getting "restyled" out of existence, even a big companies like Microsoft, and on key sights like TechNet and the MSDN technical pages.
HTML has to many of the same problems as PDFs, and PDFs have all the problems HTML does since that became one of their native internal formats. Mixing HTML and postscript is an unholy thing. First, what happens when you encapsulate HTML in a PostScript block in a PDF that also has HTML and then turn it back into Postscript to send it to a printer. Big surprise I still get about 5 jobs a year where the printer vomits up a half ream of Mojibake.
A printable document format that can contain sound files, 3d video clips, and can write to the system registry? Best of luck with that mate.
The core of the argument is still that both are crap and we should be moving toward more stable versions of both. But I'd rather view the occasional PDF in Firefox or another browser than view web content inside an Adobe app. Those idiots are responsible for Flash and Coldfusion, which should have been laid to rest in a peat bog or tar pit back in 2002.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
