[Bug 740506]

2015-12-05 Thread xormar
I think the correct statement to issue in this case would be that a part ("revision") of the PDF has been signed and to show the validation result for that revision, ideally giving the user a chance to view only the signed part. This might even be indispensable when there are multiple signatures

[Bug 1085526]

2015-12-05 Thread xormar
I think the correct statement to issue in this case would be that a part ("revision") of the PDF has been signed and to show the validation result for that revision, ideally giving the user a chance to view only the signed part. This might even be indispensable when there are multiple signatures

[Bug 740506]

2014-10-31 Thread xormar
Hi all Funding is all very well, and +1 for the initiative! But first we'll need to find developers who are willing to take up the task. Is there anyone interested in implementing this (immensely important, believe me!) feature? Can we spur his or her interest with money? Or can we say that

[Bug 1085526]

2014-10-31 Thread xormar
Hi all Funding is all very well, and +1 for the initiative! But first we'll need to find developers who are willing to take up the task. Is there anyone interested in implementing this (immensely important, believe me!) feature? Can we spur his or her interest with money? Or can we say that