luigi == luigi scarso [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51502
i assume that the free ref manual at the adobe site is ok too
luigi I expect differences --and iso is better -- .
Someone from Adobe (maybe Len or Tom) wrote
Martin Schröder wrote:
Which is why I'm asking. Acro 9 produces 1.8?
hm, i didn't test distiller but there were no new bet areference manuals
so i think that not much changed in raw pdf (special kind of annotations
is another matter)
also, validation is now against the several standards and
luigi scarso wrote:
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51502
i assume that the free ref manual at the adobe site is ok too
-
Hans Hagen |
2008/7/8 Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
i assume that the free ref manual at the adobe site is ok too
Which leads me to: PDF 1.8? I didn't have a chance to try out Acrobat 9...
Best
Martin
___
If your question is
Martin Schröder wrote:
2008/7/8 Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
i assume that the free ref manual at the adobe site is ok too
Which leads me to: PDF 1.8? I didn't have a chance to try out Acrobat 9...
afaik there is no 1.8 spec yet
1.9 pro runs ok with tex files (i encountered only a few
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
luigi scarso wrote:
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51502
i assume that the free ref manual at the adobe site is ok too
I expect differences --and iso is better -- .
luigi scarso wrote:
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
luigi scarso wrote:
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51502
i assume that the free ref manual at the adobe site is ok too
I expect differences --and iso
2008/7/8 Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Martin Schröder wrote:
Which leads me to: PDF 1.8? I didn't have a chance to try out Acrobat 9...
afaik there is no 1.8 spec yet
Which is why I'm asking. Acro 9 produces 1.8?
1.9 pro runs ok with tex files (i encountered only a few proofing issues)
I
I think you mean Acro 9 there, not PDF 1.9 :-)
This offset by 1 is definitely confusing :-)
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl /
Am 2008-07-08 um 17:38 schrieb Arthur Reutenauer:
I think you mean Acro 9 there, not PDF 1.9 :-)
This offset by 1 is definitely confusing :-)
It was always the same - Acrobat 1 wrote PDF 1.0, Acrobat 8 writes PDF
1.7
I guess Adobe redefined the dot as addition operator ;-)
But I fear
10 matches
Mail list logo
