Thank you very much Tilman. Foxit told me that'd need to look into why this was changed, but it's now clearly a problem with them. I guess from now on, I'll have to preprocess the XFDF, because I have no idea how many records were (or will be) produced with "rotate" since we upgraded to Foxit 11.
Thanks again, Kai ________________________________ From: Tilman Hausherr <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 15:42 To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: A question about "rotate" vs "rotation" in XFDF Am 22.01.2026 um 14:54 schrieb Kai Keggenhoff: If anyone with access to ISO 19444 would be so kind to shed some light on͏͏ [External email]<https://summary.eu1.defend.egress.com/v3/summary?ref=email&crId=697237635f69918881bcfd4a&lang=en> External email<https://summary.eu1.defend.egress.com/v3/summary?ref=email&crId=697237635f69918881bcfd4a&lang=en> [External email]<https://summary.eu1.defend.egress.com/v3/summary?ref=email&crId=697237635f69918881bcfd4a&lang=en> Am 22.01.2026 um 14:54 schrieb Kai Keggenhoff: If anyone with access to ISO 19444 would be so kind to shed some light on whether annotations, mainly of type FreeText, should or should not have a "rotate" or "rotation" attribute, I would be very thankful. I have only a 2007 specification and it's "rotation": [cid:[email protected]] I didn't find anything in the PDF specification. Weird. Tilman
