Re: Drop RTF Support?
On Aug 10, 2007, at 18:33, b.ohnsorg wrote: Nicol Bolas wrote: ... I'm sorry. That didn't make sense. Could you please repeat it, using something more closely resembling actual English? I don't actually understand your point or even what your sentences are trying to say. It wouldn't make more sense if I'd try to say it in other words. Was my fault to try to express it in a language different from my mother tongue. (And it would be even harder for me to explain it even as native speaker to transport the idea of accepting things that don't make sense in any logical way but get payed at least.) So please drop RTF-export, 'cause it doesn't make sense to transform anything expressable by XSL-FO to something that 70% of «business people» use every day. And that's why everybody should get used to talk, write and understand XSL-FO. BTW, did you recognize that not even FOP is fully XSL-FO capable and some of the ideas behind XSL-FO can't be transformed with it to...Post Script? So please also drop XSL-FO-parsing-support from FOP. :-) Now there's a point! I agree. RTF does have its limitations, so does TXT. Still, there is a TXT renderer incorporated in FOP. Should we drop it entirely, because we ourselves don't have a need for it? Interesting to see so many references to the sacred XSL-FO Recommendation, but never a single word about the fact that the Recommendation places *no constraint whatsoever* on the *user agents*, only the *formatter* matters. If a certain output format happens to offer only very limited features, should that format be dropped? Note: XSL-FO contains /aural/ properties as well, to control audible output. Those indeed make little sense when rendering to PostScript. Bottom-line for me: I would not drop RTF-support. Too many people have already invested their time in JFOR and its integration into FOP to let that happen. Especially not when the original motivation seems to be, yet again, an almost obsessive need to save on some maintenance... ;-) RTF is a reality. I'd rather receive a question every once in a while and see people offering useful patches to improve its quality, than move it to the sandbox and get washed away by a lot of What happened to RTF??? posts... To sum it up: my sentences don't try to say anything, that's why I'll do something different than wasting energy by sending mails to that list. I'm not pissed nor disappointed but I'm not eager enough to teach philosophy to everybody and start with the meaning of life to explain my point of view 'bout FOP and RTF-support. If it still doesn't make sense to you: I ought to start drinking before stop thinking. Oh, I think you make perfect sense: there are boundaries to all logical arguments. Points beyond which there simply is no point anymore. :-) Cheers Andreas
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43089] - [PATCH] PDFRenderer - text-decoration (e.g. underline) not being renderered with Type1 fonts
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43089. 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=43089 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-10 08:34 --- Created an attachment (id=20639) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20639action=view) patch file * Improves error log output in PDFRender.drawBorderLine(). * Fixes descender calculation used from PFMFile. -- 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.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43070] - [PATCH] Postscript extension : comment before and after page
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43070. 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=43070 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #20625|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-10 02:21 --- Created an attachment (id=20635) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20635action=view) patch file This patch file superceeds the last one. It fixes a bug that I introduced on PSRenderer.java in the patch file I provided yesterday. Adrian. -- 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.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43089] New: - [PATCH] PDFRenderer - text-decoration (e.g. underline) not being renderered with Type1 fonts
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43089. 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=43089 Summary: [PATCH] PDFRenderer - text-decoration (e.g. underline) not being renderered with Type1 fonts Product: Fop Version: 1.0dev Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P1 Component: fonts AssignedTo: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm a little surprised that no-one hasn't come across this bug sooner, but I managed to verify its existence and provide a patch that seems to fix the problem. I guess its not been discovered because most PDF renderer users must favour using truetype fonts. A positive descender value was being used on type 1 fonts when calculating the line width for text-decoration(s). This was causing a negative line width, resulting in the decoration line not being drawn by the PDF renderer. This patch fixes this problem. I have successfully tested the patch against a reasonably complex FO example with both the postscript and pdf renderer to try and ensure it does not break anything. You can just as easily reproduce the problem with a simple hello world! fo example with a single block (using text-decoration, referencing a type 1 font-family). Ideally it would be nice to have a JUnit test case to verify this fix against but I'm not sure about legal licensing issues with acquiring some free (GPL) type 1 fonts. Adrian. -- 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.
