I've tried to think through the "fudge factor" for this particular application and unfortunately haven't found anything that works. I have a pretty narrow target to hit with each label and by the time the differences add up, correcting for one extreme (i.e. too high or too low) inevitably causes problems at the other end of the sheet. As I said, I'm not sure that these particular labels will ever have cause to be printed from a PDF rendering, so I can develop the sheet for PCL and not worry about the problems at this point, but it does raise interesting questions in my mind about the reliability of the measurements we specify in general. How much confidence can we have that when we say Xmm, we will really be guaranteed Xmm? The line wrapping issue you mention is also intriguing. For the record, though, many thanks to all the FOP dev team for the work going on here. I poked through the code a little and there has been a ton of work to get FOP to this point. Dave
>>> Roland Neilands 5/8/2008 7:13 PM >>> I'll second this. I also see difference in either text sizes or field width causing line wrapping in several places in PCL but not PDF with the same file. The workaround is to allow a fudge factor in the field/table row/table height sizes, but this can cause text overlapping or large blank areas, so it's hardly ideal. Regards, *Roland * David Gerdt wrote: > I'm curious as to the differences between how distances are measured > between different output formats. I've been trying to get a sheet of > address labels to align correctly and am noticing a vast difference > between how they are rendered in a PDF vs how they appear in PCL. > > I use a combination of Eclipse and the Orangevolt XSLT plugin to > develop my style sheets and generate PDFs on a WinXP box because I can > quickly see the results. Ultimately, the documents will be rendered on > an AIX system, normally (though not always) as PCL. There are > instances where the same document can be rendered in either of these > two formats, and that's why these differences make me nervous. > > In the case of the mailing labels, I'm noticing about a 1mm difference > in height for the table cells. PDF cells are right at 26mm and PCL at > 27mm. That sounds like a very slight difference, but it adds up to a > 1cm difference over the ten rows of the sheet of labels. Also, the top > margin has a difference of about 5mm between the two formats, with the > first table row starting at 17mm in the PDF output and about 12mm for > the PCL version. > > Can anyone give any insight? Is this just a driver thing? > > I am running the 0.95beta on both machines. The fo is attached if > you're interested. > > Thanks for the help! > > This e-mail is solely for the use of the intended recipient and may > contain information which is confidential or privileged. Any > unauthorised use of its contents is prohibited. If you have received > this e-mail in error, please notify the sender via return e-mail and > then delete the original e-mail. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail is solely for the use of the intended recipient and may contain information which is confidential or privileged. Any unauthorised use of its contents is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender via return e-mail and then delete the original e-mail. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
