Re: commit to fop

[Renaud Richardet]

jeremias and simon: thanks for your response. now i see better where to look.
i'll follow the maillinglist & start to dig in the code.

renaud

Re: Background images

[Jeremias Maerki]

On 20.01.2005 19:37:06 Glen Mazza wrote:
> --- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Team,
> > 
> > I'm going to implement background images as one of
> > my next steps. 
> 
> Good.
> 
> > I
> > found that even in 1.1 WD there's no way to scale
> > the background image.
> 
> Jeremias, please do another scan first of the 1.1
> document--thankfully it's all in one HTML file--search
> for both "scale" and "scaling" throughout to (1) make
> sure that is the case (there appear to be some new
> properties and even formatting objects related to
> scaling), and (2) to see if there is any scaling logic
> that you're contemplating that may be applicable in
> other areas as well.

Thanks for the tip. The scan turned up empty. All scaling enhancements
seem to apply to external-graphic only.

> Next, you may wish to check the AntennaHouse and
> RenderX extension element/attribute list.  There may
> be something you can learn there about background
> scaling, also when you send emails to the xsl-editors
> list saying "[insert commercial company here] already
> does this", etc., it will carry more weight.

I've seen the RenderX extensions. It's really surprising that RenderX
didn't manage to bring that in, yet.

> > Should we skip that or should we define our own
> > properties? 
> 
> I don't care either way.  Although I don't understand
> why the specification doesn't already handle
> background image scaling.  Something is rotten in the
> State of Denmark here--this would seem to be a common
> need.
> 
> 
> > Maybe Glen
> > wants to talk to the WG about that.
> > 
> 
> Would be delighted.  But imaging issues are beyond my
> scope, and it's about time the WG learn more about you
> as well.  Please do so, also mention that you're from
> FOP as well please.  (Not that you need my
> permission.)
> 
> (This is gonna be great--with both of us sending
> comments to the W3C, we can use a good-cop/bad-cop
> technique to persuade them.  Guess which role I want
> to play? ;)

LOL! I'll try to write something, but I guess I have some other
priorities first. I'll probably also skip these scaling things for now.
This can be added later. My enhancement to parse the bitmap resolution
might also help a bit in the meantime.

Jeremias Maerki

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33164] - ArrayIndexOutOfBounds on extern graphic in PCL

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33164





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-01-20 19:50 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is a known issue. The PCL Renderer is very primitive, see the website 
> for 
> more info on limitations:
> 
> http://xml.apache.org/fop/output.html#pcl

Okay, thanks.

I saw that, but it didn't say that images wouldn't be rendered, just that 
they'd 
be monochrome and not rendered properly if outside the printable area.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Re: Background images

[Glen Mazza]

--- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Team,
> 
> I'm going to implement background images as one of
> my next steps. 

Good.

> I
> found that even in 1.1 WD there's no way to scale
> the background image.

Jeremias, please do another scan first of the 1.1
document--thankfully it's all in one HTML file--search
for both "scale" and "scaling" throughout to (1) make
sure that is the case (there appear to be some new
properties and even formatting objects related to
scaling), and (2) to see if there is any scaling logic
that you're contemplating that may be applicable in
other areas as well.

Next, you may wish to check the AntennaHouse and
RenderX extension element/attribute list.  There may
be something you can learn there about background
scaling, also when you send emails to the xsl-editors
list saying "[insert commercial company here] already
does this", etc., it will carry more weight.


> Should we skip that or should we define our own
> properties? 

I don't care either way.  Although I don't understand
why the specification doesn't already handle
background image scaling.  Something is rotten in the
State of Denmark here--this would seem to be a common
need.


> Maybe Glen
> wants to talk to the WG about that.
> 

Would be delighted.  But imaging issues are beyond my
scope, and it's about time the WG learn more about you
as well.  Please do so, also mention that you're from
FOP as well please.  (Not that you need my
permission.)

(This is gonna be great--with both of us sending
comments to the W3C, we can use a good-cop/bad-cop
technique to persuade them.  Guess which role I want
to play? ;)

Thanks,
Glen

Re: Background images

[The Web Maestro]

On Jan 20, 2005, at 2:19 AM, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Team,
I'm going to implement background images as one of my next steps. I
found that even in 1.1 WD there's no way to scale the background image.
Should we skip that or should we define our own properties? Maybe Glen
wants to talk to the WG about that.
Jeremias Maerki
+1 for enabling this attribute/feature.
Since that's something that is oft-requested (well, considering how 
many requests we get), I think it's a good idea to implement this. 
Perhaps, since it's not part of the 1.0 or 1.1 spec (yet), it should be 
made as an extension (although i don't know how this would work since 
it's an attribute... maybe by enabling content-width & 
content-height?)?

Web Maestro Clay
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 
My religion is simple. My religion is kindness.
- HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet

RE: Cause for "Too many arguments" in Adobe Reader 7?

[Matthew Langham]

Ok, I guess I can answer that one now myself. Looks as those having the
problem are running an old version of FOP - as this bug error:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9054 seems to be exactly
that.

Matthew

-- 

S&N AG
Competence Center Open Source
Klingenderstr. 5 
D 33100 Paderborn

voice  +49 5251/1581-30
fax+49 5251/1581-71
eMail  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webhttp://www.s-und-n.de

-
Wincor World 2005 - Vision at Work
Besuchen Sie unseren Gold-Partnerstand
vom 25.-27.01.05 in Paderborn
-

 

> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew Langham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 3:18 PM
> To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Cause for "Too many arguments" in Adobe Reader 7?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> A few people seem to be having problems opening FOP generated 
> PDFs with the new Adobe Reader 7. They basically get an error 
> message "There were too many arguments" and after closing the 
> error box, the document is displayed normally.
> 
> To date I have not seen an answer to this and therefore 
> posted the problem again to the Adobe support forum. And I 
> received a reply that basically states there is an error in 
> the PDF - the whole anser is here:
> 
> http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?50@@.3bb7ebc6/1!login=true
> 
> Just "Login as Guest" to read the thread.
> 
> 
> The author of the answer also points here as to the cause:
> 
> http://multivalent.sourceforge.net/news.html
> 
> >
> workarounds for buggy PDF generators
> ...
> FOP 0.20.3 inserts the Tc PDF operator in the middle of the 
> TJ operator <
> 
> 
> Can someone from the FOP team give me a heads-up on this - 
> and is there a fix? And I apologize if this has already been 
> discussed somewhere - just point me there.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Matthew Langham
> 

Cause for "Too many arguments" in Adobe Reader 7?

[Matthew Langham]

Hi,

A few people seem to be having problems opening FOP generated PDFs with the
new Adobe Reader 7. They basically get an error message "There were too many
arguments" and after closing the error box, the document is displayed
normally.

To date I have not seen an answer to this and therefore posted the problem
again to the Adobe support forum. And I received a reply that basically
states there is an error in the PDF - the whole anser is here:

http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?50@@.3bb7ebc6/1!login=true

Just "Login as Guest" to read the thread.


The author of the answer also points here as to the cause:

http://multivalent.sourceforge.net/news.html

>
workarounds for buggy PDF generators 
...
FOP 0.20.3 inserts the Tc PDF operator in the middle of the TJ
operator 
<


Can someone from the FOP team give me a heads-up on this - and is there a
fix? And I apologize if this has already been discussed somewhere - just
point me there.

Thanks

Matthew Langham

Background images

[Jeremias Maerki]

Team,

I'm going to implement background images as one of my next steps. I
found that even in 1.1 WD there's no way to scale the background image.
Should we skip that or should we define our own properties? Maybe Glen
wants to talk to the WG about that.

Jeremias Maerki

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33174] New: - An unrecognized token'NaN' was found when opening pdf file with Acrobat Reader 6.0

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33174

   Summary: An unrecognized token'NaN' was found when opening pdf
file  with Acrobat Reader 6.0
   Product: Fop
   Version: 0.20.5
  Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: pdf renderer
AssignedTo: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


During converting the fo file to pdf file , all seem to be ok. Although there 
are some errors and warnings, all are about unimplemented property. Then I 
open the pdf, and the Reader told me that an unrecognized token'NaN' was found 
when opening pdf file . But the file is still be opened with the exception of 
that the first page is blank.

The strcuture of the fo file is very simple, only a table. It has a header, 
footer and body. Under the header and footer, there is only one row. But there 
are over more than 2000 rows enclosed in the table body.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.