Dear All, There seems to have been a change from 0.94 to 0.95BETA. I'm not sure if this is intentional, but the encoding 'ZapfDingbatsEncoding' (which I understand to be some kind of FOP-specific workaround) is making it into the final PDF output:
128 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /Type1 /BaseFont /ZapfDingbats /Encoding /ZapfDingbatsEncoding >> I believe 0.94 also used ZapfDingbatsEncoding, but final PDFs produced by 0.94 don't include it: 127 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /Type1 /Name /F14 /BaseFont /ZapfDingbats >> As far as I understand, ZapfDingbatsEncoding is not a 'standard' encoding like WinAnsiEncoding, and so this causes problems for PDF processing tools. For example, PDFBox (http://www.pdfbox.org) balks at stripping text from 0.95BETA PDFs because of it, whereas it works fine with 0.94 PDFs. Is there any guidance for this issue? Your help is much appreciated, Richard. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/0.95BETA-Regression%3A-ZapfDingbatsEncoding-in-final-PDF-output--tp16738796p16738796.html Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
