I wouldn't call that a limitation. In fact that is one of the major selling points of the PDF format. The document looks as intended* by the creator on all platforms whether display or print media.

* Yes, I know, PDF doesn't -always- do this, but a well designed PDF generally does.

It is a limitation. Anyone who's ever tried to read a PDF journal article on their phone has experienced it. (and don't even get me started on Unicode copy/paste...)

HTML can be styled in a fixed layout if desired, and reflowed by a reader mode if needed. PDF can't be styled in a responsive way, and there's no (easily accessible) reader mode equivalent for PDFs.

HTML is a far better document format than PDF.

> there's no (easily accessible) reader mode equivalent for PDFs.

It’s called Liquid Mode in Reader, and it is, in fact, easily accessible.

> HTML is a far better document format than PDF.

HTML is better for some things, PDF for others. That's why PDF is widely used on the web when HTML is available.

Liquid mode only works we for a subset of PDF files. And sometimes it doesn't work at all.

Reader mode only works well for a subset of HTML files, too.

Yes, of course.

A significant advantage of the two column journal format (although still they end up feeling pretty clunky on a phone).

True, but the rigid layout is what makes PDF unsuitable for some use cases. It’s main use is to represent a printed page of a very specific size. Anything outside that just requires too much flexibility.

Feature.

The dimensioning problem isn't PDFs. The dimensioning problem is computer displays.

Get yourself an e-ink display of 10" or 13" (standard dimensions offered by the patent-monopoly vendor across multiple OEMs), and discover that online reading of PDFs is 1) quite pleasant (so long as the underlying PDF formatting itself is sane) and 2) vastly preferable to either HTML or "fluid" ePub or Mobi file formats.

Book formats developed over about 500 years largely guided by the capabilities and limitations of human eyes and hands. Typical mass-market books range in size from roughly 6" to 12" diagonal measure. Yes, there are smaller and larger formats, these are deviations from the norm and impose compromises for other concerns (portability for smaller formats, resolution for larger ones, typically pictoral or graphical in nature).

A 5" or 6" mobile device presents less display area than an index card. Laptop displays are too short to display a portrait-mode document one page at a time, and in almost all cases too small to present a 2-page up display.

(You can verify this yourself trivially at the Internet Archive using its BookReader, e.g., https://archive.org/details/UnderstandingPhotoTypesetting/pa...)

When wedding PDFs with an appropriate display technology, the frustrations fixed-proportion PDF display disappear.

This does rely on the PDF being dimensioned for a typical book size, though there's considerable flexibility here, and any dimensions from ~6" to well over 12" will tend to be readable, there's no need for precisely matching device to document size.

I'm saying this as someone who's long railed against PDFs for documentation. My mind's been changed.

>Get yourself an e-ink display of 10" or 13" (standard dimensions offered by the patent-monopoly vendor across multiple OEMs), and discover that online reading of PDFs is 1) quite pleasant (so long as the underlying PDF formatting itself is sane) and 2) vastly preferable to either HTML or "fluid" ePub or Mobi file formats.

Notably this is not the standard size for most e-ink devices though, on which pdfs are a pain to read. Mobi/epub files, in contrast, are fantastic on my kindle (and on my phone, and on desktop).

If your argument has to boil down to "this file format is great if you just buy a specific device for viewing them, and eschew viewing them on any of the other devices you already own and use more frequently", I'd say your argument provides more evidence for the counterpoint than for the one you're arguing.

I'm happy you found a good way to consume a fundamentally outdated format, but PDFs are a bad format for the majority of use cases.

Oddly enough, my purchase decision was driven specifically by considerations of size, resolution, and suitedness to task.

Again: at 8", e-ink is pretty broadly useful. If you're frequently reading scanned-in journal articles, the 10" or 13" devices shine, though these can be accessed on smaller screens using in-page zoom-and-scroll. (Onyx BOOX has several settings for this in its NeoReader app.)

Note-taking, which was not a use I anticipated using, also happens to be really well-suited.

Yes, you can read on a smaller device if you must. However you're making the same sacrifices for mobility that are present in pocket-sized printed books, and the format is best suited to largely unformatted text (e.g., prose). Diagrams, tables, and other layout translate quite poorly, and this is intrinsic to the display itself.

The one task to which the tablet format seems best suited is precisely e-book reading. So I've ditched the "smartphone" (a pocket snoop) and settled on laptop / desktop (productivity) + tablet (ebooks), and dedicated devices for specific other applications, most especially capture (audio, images, video).

"The Case Against Tablets"

https://joindiaspora.com/posts/880e5c403edb013918e1002590d8e...