Re: Postscript printing on Mac OS X
That would be great! ... Can you give a short message when you have testable version? Thanks, Alex Am 09.01.2008 um 21:35 schrieb Jeremias Maerki: Indeed, the BoundingBox is currently not generated. There's no magic setting to enable this. Implementing this is fairly simple, however. Maybe I have time in the next few days. On 08.01.2008 22:51:56 Alexander Lohse wrote: Hi, on Mac OS X 10.5 the printing queue complains about "No % %BoundingBox: comment in header!" when sending a FOP-generated PS-File. The file will eventually print anyways, but some printers (namely XEROX Phaser 8400) show a message about missing paper ... It will print after a while (maybe some fallback mechanism) but things seem to take very long. Any ideas on this? Can this %%BoundingBox some be created, maybe some param/setting I am missing? I am using a SVN-Trunk checkout from about 6 weeks ago. The PS-File is sent through standard java-printing api, selecting specific trays and media-sizes. Thank you in advance, Alex __ Alexander Lohse • Entwicklungsleitung & Projektmanagement Tel +49 38374 752 11 • Fax +49 38374 752 23 http://www.humantouch.de Human Touch Medienproduktion GmbH Am See 1 • 17440 Klein Jasedow • Deutschland Geschäftsführung: Lara Mallien, Nele Hybsier, Alexander Lohse, Johannes Heimrath (Senior) Handelsregister Stralsund • HRB 4192 • USt-IdNr. DE128367684 Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Alexander Lohse • Entwicklungsleitung & Projektmanagement Tel +49 38374 752 11 • Fax +49 38374 752 23 http://www.humantouch.de Human Touch Medienproduktion GmbH Am See 1 • 17440 Klein Jasedow • Deutschland Geschäftsführung: Lara Mallien, Nele Hybsier, Alexander Lohse, Johannes Heimrath (Senior) Handelsregister Stralsund • HRB 4192 • USt-IdNr. DE128367684 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 508 compliance
On 09.01.2008 21:29:31 Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > > On Jan 9, 2008, at 20:53, Li, Hao wrote: > > > Thanks Andreas. > > > > Yes. It is about accessibility. Although the pdf can be generated, the > > customer does not like it because of accessibility issues, for > > example: > > missing PDF tags, lacking language specification etc. > > > > After searching about tagged pdf, I found > > http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/pdfa.html. It seems that > > PDF/A-1b is implemented, but not PDF/A-1a. Does it mean tagged PDF is > > not supported yet? > > Indeed. I know Jeremias recently mentioned tagged PDF as a (rather > long term) goal, so there is definitely interest from other parties > in adding this functionality as well. Right, there is some interest but so far it rather seems to be "nice to have" than "must have". Furthermore, nobody can tell how far we'd have to go with support for Tagged PDF. You can take a minimal approach or go all the way. But in any scenario it will have a larger impact on the area tree and renderers as far as I can judge right now (without having looked into it too closely). > > I will be testing it as well. If not, do you happen > > to know nay java plugin or product that can make accessible FO > > conversion? > > Maybe you can have a look at post-processors, like iText (http:// > www.lowagie.com/iText/) or PDFBox (http://www.pdfbox.org/). > They can be used in conjunction with FOP in a fairly straightforward > manner. Use FOP to generate the basic PDF, and feed the output to the > post-processor for further enhancements. Only they won't help with accessibility. As long as FOP cannot pass on accessibility information from XSL-FO to the PDF there's nothing that any post-processor can magically add. I think there are some commercial XSL-FO implementations that support a certain degree of Tagged PDF but I don't know far they go and if that would cover the 508 requirements. > > HTH! > > Cheers > > Andreas Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postscript printing on Mac OS X
Indeed, the BoundingBox is currently not generated. There's no magic setting to enable this. Implementing this is fairly simple, however. Maybe I have time in the next few days. On 08.01.2008 22:51:56 Alexander Lohse wrote: > Hi, > > on Mac OS X 10.5 the printing queue complains about "No %%BoundingBox: > comment in header!" when sending a FOP-generated PS-File. > > The file will eventually print anyways, but some printers (namely > XEROX Phaser 8400) show a message about missing paper ... It will > print after a while (maybe some fallback mechanism) but things seem to > take very long. > > Any ideas on this? > > Can this %%BoundingBox some be created, maybe some param/setting I am > missing? > > I am using a SVN-Trunk checkout from about 6 weeks ago. The PS-File is > sent through standard java-printing api, selecting specific trays and > media-sizes. > > Thank you in advance, > > Alex > __ > > Alexander Lohse • Entwicklungsleitung & Projektmanagement > Tel +49 38374 752 11 • Fax +49 38374 752 23 > http://www.humantouch.de > > Human Touch Medienproduktion GmbH > Am See 1 • 17440 Klein Jasedow • Deutschland > > Geschäftsführung: > Lara Mallien, Nele Hybsier, Alexander Lohse, Johannes Heimrath (Senior) > Handelsregister Stralsund • HRB 4192 • USt-IdNr. DE128367684 > Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 508 compliance
On Jan 9, 2008, at 20:53, Li, Hao wrote: Thanks Andreas. Yes. It is about accessibility. Although the pdf can be generated, the customer does not like it because of accessibility issues, for example: missing PDF tags, lacking language specification etc. After searching about tagged pdf, I found http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/pdfa.html. It seems that PDF/A-1b is implemented, but not PDF/A-1a. Does it mean tagged PDF is not supported yet? Indeed. I know Jeremias recently mentioned tagged PDF as a (rather long term) goal, so there is definitely interest from other parties in adding this functionality as well. I will be testing it as well. If not, do you happen to know nay java plugin or product that can make accessible FO conversion? Maybe you can have a look at post-processors, like iText (http:// www.lowagie.com/iText/) or PDFBox (http://www.pdfbox.org/). They can be used in conjunction with FOP in a fairly straightforward manner. Use FOP to generate the basic PDF, and feed the output to the post-processor for further enhancements. HTH! Cheers Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 508 compliance
On Jan 9, 2008, at 20:51, Christopher R. Maden wrote: On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 20:29 +0100, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: At first glance, it seems to be something that applies to "accessibility" of information in general (is not restricted to printed media). Yes. It would be better to make the information available in the PDF available in other formats as well. This was kind of the point of XML and XSL: provide your information via multiple channels. Note that the 'Common Accessibility' properties, as defined by the XSL Rec, are for the largest part unimplemented in FOP at the moment. I’m honestly not sure what FOP would do with them, anyway. A single XSL stylesheet might say that emphasis should be both bold and loud, but I would expect a print formatter to ignore the loudness just as I would expect an audio formatter to ignore the boldness. OK. What I meant was more that, some PDF viewers offer room for both. Adobe Reader has a 'Read Out Loud' option, which is available for PDFs generated by FOP. What I do know for certain is that FOP currently simply ignores the applicable properties, while in theory, it seems that the PDF renderer could actually do something with those. Maybe Adobe Reader could make use of XSL's accessibility properties, if FOP generated extra info in its PDFs. Right now, reading a page out loud is still a quite monotonous experience (worse than the average lecture in a university or parliament ;-)) And then, there is of course the possibility of someone coming up with an AudioRenderer that renders the input document to a series of standard audio output formats, on top of the current output formats. Cheers Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 508 compliance
Thanks Andreas. Yes. It is about accessibility. Although the pdf can be generated, the customer does not like it because of accessibility issues, for example: missing PDF tags, lacking language specification etc. After searching about tagged pdf, I found http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/pdfa.html. It seems that PDF/A-1b is implemented, but not PDF/A-1a. Does it mean tagged PDF is not supported yet? I will be testing it as well. If not, do you happen to know nay java plugin or product that can make accessible FO conversion? Thank you very much. -Original Message- From: Andreas L Delmelle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 2:29 PM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: 508 compliance On Jan 9, 2008, at 18:56, Li, Hao wrote: > Hi there, > > Does anyone know if the PDF generated by fop 0.93 is 508 compliant > or FOP does the effort to make it 508 compliant? Honestly, I had no idea what is meant by "508 compliance" to begin with. For all those who are interested: http://www.section508.gov/ > Or is it something relevant to the xml before the transformation > not FOP? At first glance, it seems to be something that applies to "accessibility" of information in general (is not restricted to printed media). From what I can tell immediately, I don't think this "508 compliance" holds for documents generated by FOP. Note that the 'Common Accessibility' properties, as defined by the XSL Rec, are for the largest part unimplemented in FOP at the moment. KR Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 508 compliance
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 20:29 +0100, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > At first glance, it seems to be something that applies to > "accessibility" of information in general (is not restricted to > printed media). Yes. It would be better to make the information available in the PDF available in other formats as well. This was kind of the point of XML and XSL: provide your information via multiple channels. > Note that the 'Common Accessibility' properties, as defined by the > XSL Rec, are for the largest part unimplemented in FOP at the moment. I’m honestly not sure what FOP would do with them, anyway. A single XSL stylesheet might say that emphasis should be both bold and loud, but I would expect a print formatter to ignore the loudness just as I would expect an audio formatter to ignore the boldness. ~Chris -- Chris Maden, text nerd http://crism.maden.org/ > “Metonymy and synecdoche don’t do the fighting and dying, the soldiers and the townspeople do.” —John Crowley, _Endless Things_ GnuPG Fingerprint: C6E4 E2A9 C9F8 71AC 9724 CAA3 19F8 6677 0077 C319 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 508 compliance
On Jan 9, 2008, at 18:56, Li, Hao wrote: Hi there, Does anyone know if the PDF generated by fop 0.93 is 508 compliant or FOP does the effort to make it 508 compliant? Honestly, I had no idea what is meant by "508 compliance" to begin with. For all those who are interested: http://www.section508.gov/ Or is it something relevant to the xml before the transformation not FOP? At first glance, it seems to be something that applies to "accessibility" of information in general (is not restricted to printed media). From what I can tell immediately, I don't think this "508 compliance" holds for documents generated by FOP. Note that the 'Common Accessibility' properties, as defined by the XSL Rec, are for the largest part unimplemented in FOP at the moment. KR Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
508 compliance
Hi there, Does anyone know if the PDF generated by fop 0.93 is 508 compliant or FOP does the effort to make it 508 compliant? Or is it something relevant to the xml before the transformation not FOP? Any information is greatly appreciated. Thank you very much in advance. This is urgent to us. Henry
