On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Heiko Oberdiek < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 01:31:02AM +0100, Hartmut Henkel wrote: > > > ah, the /Resources 49 0 R are in the /Pages dictionary, somehow one > > level higher than usual (is this allowed? Maybe, but not checked yet). > > Yes, PDF specification says in table 3.27 "Entries in a page object": > > | Resource dictionary (Required; inheritable) [...] > > and > > | Inheritance of Page Attributes > | > | Some of the page attributes shown in Table 3.27 are designated as > | inheritable. If such an attribute is omitted from a page object, > | its value is inherited from an ancestor node in the page tree. > | If the attribute is a required one, a value must be supplied > | in an ancestor node. If the attribute is optional and no inherited > | value is specified, the default value is used. > > Yours sincerely > Heiko Oberdiek > This is fascinating, but way over my head, I'm afraid. Should I conclude that Scribus is the culprit, as it has produced an invalid pdf file? Perhaps I should fiel a buf report with the Scribus people. But does anyone know why XeTeX and pdfLaTeX are oblivious to the pdf format violation? Is that relevant for a better description of the problem? Cheers, Stefano
