You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pdfbox.apache.org by Maruan Sahyoun <sa...@fileaffairs.de> on 2015/11/06 18:37:27 UTC
[DISCUSS] PDFBOX-3094 How to treat common fields when merging forms
Hi,
when merging forms we are currently treating common fields like different ones i.e. we rename the fields of the merged documents so they have unique names. Adobe handles that differently where names common between documents are treated as the same field (with the value of the first becoming the value of all). If the field values shall be retained they do merge into a portfolio i.e. the individual PDFs remain independent.
Shouldn't we - from 2.0 onwards - handle merging forms similar to Adobe although that's different to how we do it today?
BR
Maruan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pdfbox.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] PDFBOX-3094 How to treat common fields when merging
forms
Posted by Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>.
Am 06.11.2015 um 18:44 schrieb Maruan Sahyoun:
>> Am 06.11.2015 um 18:40 schrieb Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>:
>>
>> Am 06.11.2015 um 18:37 schrieb Maruan Sahyoun:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> when merging forms we are currently treating common fields like different ones i.e. we rename the fields of the merged documents so they have unique names. Adobe handles that differently where names common between documents are treated as the same field (with the value of the first becoming the value of all). If the field values shall be retained they do merge into a portfolio i.e. the individual PDFs remain independent.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't we - from 2.0 onwards - handle merging forms similar to Adobe although that's different to how we do it today?
>> why not make it an option to do it one way or another?
> OK - with the default being the 'Adobe way' and a compatibility mode with the 1.8 behavior?
Compatibility is best.
Tilman
>
> Maruan
>
>> Tilman
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pdfbox.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] PDFBOX-3094 How to treat common fields when merging forms
Posted by Maruan Sahyoun <sa...@fileaffairs.de>.
> Am 06.11.2015 um 18:40 schrieb Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>:
>
> Am 06.11.2015 um 18:37 schrieb Maruan Sahyoun:
>> Hi,
>>
>> when merging forms we are currently treating common fields like different ones i.e. we rename the fields of the merged documents so they have unique names. Adobe handles that differently where names common between documents are treated as the same field (with the value of the first becoming the value of all). If the field values shall be retained they do merge into a portfolio i.e. the individual PDFs remain independent.
>>
>> Shouldn't we - from 2.0 onwards - handle merging forms similar to Adobe although that's different to how we do it today?
>
> why not make it an option to do it one way or another?
OK - with the default being the 'Adobe way' and a compatibility mode with the 1.8 behavior?
Maruan
>
> Tilman
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pdfbox.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] PDFBOX-3094 How to treat common fields when merging
forms
Posted by Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>.
Am 06.11.2015 um 18:37 schrieb Maruan Sahyoun:
> Hi,
>
> when merging forms we are currently treating common fields like different ones i.e. we rename the fields of the merged documents so they have unique names. Adobe handles that differently where names common between documents are treated as the same field (with the value of the first becoming the value of all). If the field values shall be retained they do merge into a portfolio i.e. the individual PDFs remain independent.
>
> Shouldn't we - from 2.0 onwards - handle merging forms similar to Adobe although that's different to how we do it today?
why not make it an option to do it one way or another?
Tilman
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@pdfbox.apache.org