[tex-k] (fwd) Bug#337805: tetex-bin: dvips should include document's title in Postscript instead of DVI filename

[Pierre THIERRY]

Scribit Staszek Wawrykiewicz dies 18/11/2005 hora 06:52:
> Please run (la)tex --jobname=what_you_want_to_name foo.tex

My LaTeX file compiles fine with just LaTeX, but not with this option...

I get the following:

	! LaTeX Error: Missing \begin{document}.

	See the LaTeX manual or LaTeX Companion for explanation.
	Type  H <return>  for immediate help.
	 ...

	l.15 \begin{document}

> > I find it kinda weird when a PDF I open has a title like
> > 'ms29paper.doc' or 'godel.dvi'...
> Hmmm, you mean the title bar? It always shows just foo.pdf...

At least not in evince (Unix) and gv (Unix/Windows), who show the
content of the Postscript title in their title bar.

In Acrobat Reader under Windows, if the user happen to check the
properties of the document, the first information in the window is also
this Postscript title.

> > > But lines like
> > > %%Title: multlog.dvi
> > > %DVIPSCommandLine: /usr/TeX-live/bin/i386-linux/dvips multlog.dvi
> > > still constitute a tiny leak of privacy.
> > +1 too
> See above. Ahh, what's the real secret!!!

``tiny leak of privacy'', not confidential disclosure...

> Do you know many people browsing .ps files?

No, but PDF files, yes, with the increasing integration of PDF viewers
in browsers...

> How could it hurt your privacy?

Sometimes I don't want my recipient to know exactly with what tools I
did my work, and I don't want to be forced to be careful with the
filenames I use, because they will leak into my publications.

Imagine one of my employees don't appreciate my costumer Foo (maybe with
reason, because he is incorrect with him...), and names the file
audit-for-fucking-foo.tex. If my customer happens to see that in his
delivered audit, gosh. He won't appreciate much.

So it definitely IS a potential privacy leak, and as it could be
possible to have mention of the original TeX/DVI file in the Postscript
result because some find it useful, IMHO it should not be there by
default (as for any potential security problem). 


FWIW, it's far more logical to put a title in a title field than a file
name...

Quickly,
Nowhere man
-- 
nowhere.man at levallois.eu.org
OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-k/attachments/20051118/5ffac1f6/attachment.bin