version of PDF to produce

[James Tauber <jt...@jtauber.com>]

Discussions of Font support has raised an important issue in my mind:

Which version of PDF should we produce? This affects the version of Acrobat
Reader necessary to view the PDF output of FOP.

James

RE: version of PDF to produce

[Fotis Jannidis <Fo...@lrz.uni-muenchen.de>]

> There is a new java version of acrobat.  I haven't tried it, but that would
> be a work-around (was that a polite statement?) for those other OSs.
The java version is beta at the moment and will be payware at the end. 
Fotis

RE: version of PDF to produce

[Clay Atkins <ca...@spcmg.com>]

There is a new java version of acrobat.  I haven't tried it, but that would
be a work-around (was that a polite statement?) for those other OSs.


> > Discussions of Font support has raised an important issue in my mind:
> >
> > Which version of PDF should we produce? This affects the version of
Acrobat
> > Reader necessary to view the PDF output of FOP.

Acrobat Reader 4.0 runs on all platforms which Reader 3.0 is running on
except
SunOS, Win 3.1 and OS/2 Warp, which are not supported any longer and
actually I
don't even know somebody, who is still working with one of them (Well, OS/2
is still used
by many of the larger financial institutes in Germany, but AFAIK even IBM
has stopped
supporting it as an desktop OS).

Fotis

Re: version of PDF to produce

[Fotis Jannidis <Fo...@lrz.uni-muenchen.de>]

> > Discussions of Font support has raised an important issue in my mind:
> > 
> > Which version of PDF should we produce? This affects the version of Acrobat
> > Reader necessary to view the PDF output of FOP.

Acrobat Reader 4.0 runs on all platforms which Reader 3.0 is running on except 
SunOS, Win 3.1 and OS/2 Warp, which are not supported any longer and actually I 
don't even know somebody, who is still working with one of them (Well, OS/2 is still used 
by many of the larger financial institutes in Germany, but AFAIK even IBM has stopped 
supporting it as an desktop OS).

Fotis

Re: version of PDF to produce

[Wong Kok Wai <wo...@pacific.net.sg>]

My suggestion: the base version is should be 1.2 with a command line switch to
1.3.

James Tauber wrote:

>
> Which version of PDF should we produce? This affects the version of Acrobat
> Reader necessary to view the PDF output of FOP.
>

Re: version of PDF to produce

[Arved Sandstrom <Ar...@chebucto.ns.ca>]

On Sun, 5 Dec 1999, James Tauber wrote:

> Discussions of Font support has raised an important issue in my mind:
> 
> Which version of PDF should we produce? This affects the version of Acrobat
> Reader necessary to view the PDF output of FOP.
> 
I personally think we should go with 1.3. 1.2 is old, Adobe spent years
working on the new spec and it has a lot of improvements. Furthermore, you
have to have a pretty obsolete machine not to be able to run Reader 4.

I saw the suggestion about being able to switch. This is nice at first
glance, but then you get into issues in the org.apache.fop.pdf classes
about what to render depending on a given system property etc etc.

I was going to bring this up myself. I think that /FileSpec, which I use
in the simple link stuff, is actually a 1.3 construct, and that in 1.2
it's just /F. So this had to be hashed out anyway.

Arved