Uh-oh indeed. Like most statements involving the word “is”, this is probably one of those questions that should be dissolved. Thus I will ask:
What do you mean when you say document? I.e. what are the characteristics that a document has which a JPEG file does not, and which a PDF does have? Why is it wrong for something that is an image to also be a document?
I’ll try: You don’t need OCR to get the words out of the document. An image is just dots and/or geometric shapes. (Which would make a copy-protected PDF not a document.)
This seems to be actively running away from the point. Also, see the other response re: my lack of interest in this particular ontological discussion.
In my example, there’s also a concrete reason to distinguish between images and documents. The image is going to be embedded on a webpage, where people will simply look at it. Meanwhile, the document is going to be printed off as an actual physical document. Their respective formats are generally optimised for these different purposes.
Uh-oh indeed. Like most statements involving the word “is”, this is probably one of those questions that should be dissolved. Thus I will ask:
What do you mean when you say document? I.e. what are the characteristics that a document has which a JPEG file does not, and which a PDF does have? Why is it wrong for something that is an image to also be a document?
I’ll try: You don’t need OCR to get the words out of the document. An image is just dots and/or geometric shapes. (Which would make a copy-protected PDF not a document.)
This seems to be actively running away from the point. Also, see the other response re: my lack of interest in this particular ontological discussion.
In my example, there’s also a concrete reason to distinguish between images and documents. The image is going to be embedded on a webpage, where people will simply look at it. Meanwhile, the document is going to be printed off as an actual physical document. Their respective formats are generally optimised for these different purposes.