[CESG] Formatting question for docs

[Barkley, Erik J (US 343J)]

A judgment call, for sure as to how complicated or not to make a diagram for conveying detailed information versus concept, etc. But, to get to the question more or less directly, I would favor being able to zoom in on the .pdf --
 I  cannot recall the last time I read any technical material on a printed page - it's always on the computer/large monitor, etc.

-Erik
From: CESG <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> On Behalf Of Lux, Jim (US 430E) via CESG
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2026 10:04
To: cesg at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [CESG] Formatting question for docs

We're looking at some fairly detailed drawings of the process for the yellow book, and the interesting question came up:

If a drawing is very detailed, but not easily readable in a printed version, but *is* readable in a pdf viewer by zooming in, is that acceptable?  (presumes that the raw graphics is a scalable format)
Or, should our documents always be "printed form readable/usable"
I've certainly spent some time reading not so old (1980s, 1990s) standards documents that were scanned from microfilm or paper that are marginally readable, because of the scanning resolution.

I think it's safe to assume that .pdf will be readable via some application or another for decades.

What are folks's opionions?



[JPL logo]
James Lux
Data Standards Program Manager
4200 Telecom Programs and Oversight
JPL
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, CA 91109
M: 818.395.2714
O: 818.354.2075
jimlux at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:jimlux at jpl.nasa.gov>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20260423/0709e4f1/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2081 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20260423/0709e4f1/attachment-0001.png>