> -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Trotman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Hi Mike, > I didn't find the Adobe Reader reference to needing Adobe Server products. > The page I found just said it was controlled by the producer of the > document. Well, I just bumped into it in the standard Help in Adobe Reader (browsed for Commenting, then found a link to a paragraph about these 'additional usage rights') If they offer the possibility of adding these additional usage rights through the Acrobat SDK, then I assume it won't be that much of a problem to implement it, but you never know... Point is that, IMO, if you were to ask this question at Adobe, their support team would most likely tell you to 'buy Acrobat Pro' anyway and then close the issue. --Waddya mean: you want the *advantages* of our products, but you do not want to *buy* and *use* our products?-- Never hurts to try, 'though I strongly suspect they would rather help you redesign your workflow to make optimal use of their own products, than tell you how to achieve it without them... > As a follow-up question - would it be possible for FOP to add comments > to a document (with another fo:extension)? > (As my documents are generated from XML I could add comments to the XML > and regenerate.) That definitely seems like a possibility, however, it will take some digging through FOP's sources and the PDF Specification to get it right. But the bottom-line is: if it can be done for Bookmarks, it should be no problem to do something similar for Comments/Annotations --a while ago, someone already posted a link on fop-dev to a set of FOP extensions for PDF Forms functionality (to give you an idea of what is feasible) Only problem for the moment is that: - developing FOP extensions for FOP 0.20.5 would be a waste of time/resources from the POV of the FOP community, since that branch is meant to be terminated with the next release - status of the framework for extensions in development (?) --after all they are _extensions_. It's important that we first get FOP to comply with the XSL-FO Rec, only then can we start thinking about extending it. (Reminds me of a question I still have WRT extensions and our validation framework. We have made Bookmarks standard FO, since in XSL-FO 1.1 they are, but IIC, this led to an interesting little obstacle being evaded, one that will appear again once we start looking at all the other possible extensions... 'nuff babbling! That's for fop-dev, more details to follow over there.) If you think you're up to it, feel free to take a look and share some insights... I'll most certainly keep this idea in mind myself. (To be revisited.) Greetz, Andreas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
