You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Mike Trotman <mi...@datalucid.com> on 2005/04/17 12:22:56 UTC
FOP - -noannotations
HI
I'm have installed a binary version of FOP 0.20.5 on Linux.
I have jdk-1_5_0_2 installed.
Does the binary version have PDF encryption enabled?
Or - do I have to build FOP from source to activate encryption options?
According to the documentation the value of allowEditAnnotations is TRUE.
and to suppress this you would need the comandline option
-noannotations pdf file will be encrypted without edit annotation permission
However - any PDFs I produce do not have Commenting enabled - and I wish
to enable it.
Their permissions are:
Printing: Allowed
Document Assembly: Not allowed
Content Copying or Extraction: Allowed
Content Extraction for Accessibility: Allowed
Commenting: Not Allowed
Filling of Form Fields: Allowed
Signing: Not Allowed
Creation of Template Pages: Not Allowed
Submitting Forms: Not Allowed.
(or do I have to add a password AND NOT SET -noannotations ?)
Thanks for any guidance in this area.
Mike
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.15 - Release Date: 16/04/2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: How to help producing version 1.0 (was: Re: FOP -
-noannotations)
Posted by Andreas Jung <li...@andreas-jung.com>.
--On Montag, 18. April 2005 21:02 Uhr +0200 Jeremias Maerki
<de...@greenmail.ch> wrote:
> There are many ways you can help without the need for Java knowledge:
> - Helping other people on fop-users
> - Writing test cases
> - Writing documentation (Wiki or Forrest sources)
> - Updating the compliance page with additional columns for the new code
> (thus showing the progress in relation to FOP 0.20.5)
> - Cleaning up Bugzilla
> - Consolidating and updating TODO lists
> - Testing the new code and providing feedback (when the major obstacles
> are out of the way, probably in one or two months)
>
I did a lot of evaluation FO processor evaluation work over the last weeks.
The company
I am working for want to produce PDF and RTF from HTML (converted to FO
through csstoxslfo).
I did also some testing with the current development version of FOP and saw
that the PDF
still has some problems with tables (the RTF converter seems not to be
usable at this time)
and larger documents (I get OutOfMemory errors). My customer is a publisher
and has a lots
of documents for testing. Since we are looking for open-source solution
over commercial processors
I would be interested in performing further tests...what's the best way to
contribute?
Andreas
How to help producing version 1.0 (was: Re: FOP - -noannotations)
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
There are many ways you can help without the need for Java knowledge:
- Helping other people on fop-users
- Writing test cases
- Writing documentation (Wiki or Forrest sources)
- Updating the compliance page with additional columns for the new code
(thus showing the progress in relation to FOP 0.20.5)
- Cleaning up Bugzilla
- Consolidating and updating TODO lists
- Testing the new code and providing feedback (when the major obstacles
are out of the way, probably in one or two months)
Anything that frees the Java guys from non-Java stuff helps focus
energies. Any help is most welcome!
On 18.04.2005 20:40:21 Mike Trotman wrote:
> Yet another reason to see if there's any way to help in producing
> version 1.0 (as if we needed any).!
>
> I really will have to start learning Java soon to help get the best out
> of all these wonderful Apache tools.
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: FOP - -noannotations
Posted by Mike Trotman <mi...@datalucid.com>.
Thanks for looking at this Andreas
Andreas L. Delmelle wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Mike Trotman [mailto:mike.trotman@datalucid.com]
>>
>>Yes - I am opening these in Acrobat Reader 7.0.
>>
>>I know previous versions of Reader didn't allow adding comments.
>>but I know version 7.0 allows adding comments.
>>
>>
>
>Hmm... Have you tried opening any other PDFs with Reader 7.0 to see if this
>is the case?
>
>
Good point.
I have just tried changing a documents security setting in Acrobat 7.0
to allow commenting,
then viewed them in Reader - and Commenting was NOT allowed!
The Acrobat Reader documentation says the creator of the PDF controls this
while the Adobe site says LiveCycle can be used to enable commenting in
Reader 7.0.
I will seek clarification from Adobe.
>If I find the time, I'll run a few tests *with* encryption, and if necessary
>do some further lookup in the PDF Specification to see if I can find
>something WRT PDF code that controls this particular document property (esp.
>the changes in PDF 1.5 and 1.6)
>I'm also thinking... Currently FOP 0.20.5 produces PDF conforming to the 1.3
>Specification (Acrobat 4.0) --maybe that version still lacks the necessary
>commands to make it 'commentable' by Reader 7.0 (= PDF version 1.6) (? long
>shot)
>
>I'll see what I can dig up.
>
>
>
Yes - it would be good to know if it is totally impossible with PDF 1.3
or not.
>>I wondered about encryption in the binary FOP distribution because the
>>DOcs say:
>>
>>The build process automatically detects JCE presence and installs PDF
>>encryption support if possible, otherwise a stub is compiled in.
>>
>>
>
>Could be that the binary was still compiled on a machine without JCE present
>(Java 1.3 sans JCE), but I can't confirm it myself. Anyone?
>
>
>Heads-up to all those interested:
>It still needs to be fully tested, but IIC, the PDF library in FOP's
>development version solves --at least some of-- these issues.
>
>
>
Yet another reason to see if there's any way to help in producing
version 1.0 (as if we needed any).!
I really will have to start learning Java soon to help get the best out
of all these wonderful Apache tools.
>Greetz,
>
>Andreas
>
>
>
Mike
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.16 - Release Date: 18/04/2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
RE: FOP - -noannotations
Posted by "Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Trotman [mailto:mike.trotman@datalucid.com]
>
Hi Mike,
> I didn't find the Adobe Reader reference to needing Adobe Server products.
> The page I found just said it was controlled by the producer of the
> document.
Well, I just bumped into it in the standard Help in Adobe Reader (browsed
for Commenting, then found a link to a paragraph about these 'additional
usage rights')
If they offer the possibility of adding these additional usage rights
through the Acrobat SDK, then I assume it won't be that much of a problem to
implement it, but you never know...
Point is that, IMO, if you were to ask this question at Adobe, their support
team would most likely tell you to 'buy Acrobat Pro' anyway and then close
the issue. --Waddya mean: you want the *advantages* of our products, but you
do not want to *buy* and *use* our products?-- Never hurts to try, 'though I
strongly suspect they would rather help you redesign your workflow to make
optimal use of their own products, than tell you how to achieve it without
them...
> As a follow-up question - would it be possible for FOP to add comments
> to a document (with another fo:extension)?
> (As my documents are generated from XML I could add comments to the XML
> and regenerate.)
That definitely seems like a possibility, however, it will take some digging
through FOP's sources and the PDF Specification to get it right.
But the bottom-line is: if it can be done for Bookmarks, it should be no
problem to do something similar for Comments/Annotations --a while ago,
someone already posted a link on fop-dev to a set of FOP extensions for PDF
Forms functionality (to give you an idea of what is feasible)
Only problem for the moment is that:
- developing FOP extensions for FOP 0.20.5 would be a waste of
time/resources from the POV of the FOP community, since that branch is meant
to be terminated with the next release
- status of the framework for extensions in development (?) --after all they
are _extensions_. It's important that we first get FOP to comply with the
XSL-FO Rec, only then can we start thinking about extending it.
(Reminds me of a question I still have WRT extensions and our validation
framework. We have made Bookmarks standard FO, since in XSL-FO 1.1 they are,
but IIC, this led to an interesting little obstacle being evaded, one that
will appear again once we start looking at all the other possible
extensions... 'nuff babbling! That's for fop-dev, more details to follow
over there.)
If you think you're up to it, feel free to take a look and share some
insights... I'll most certainly keep this idea in mind myself.
(To be revisited.)
Greetz,
Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: FOP - -noannotations
Posted by Mike Trotman <mi...@datalucid.com>.
Thanks for the detailed info Andreas.
I didn't find the Adobe Reader reference to needing Adobe Server products.
The page I found just said it was controlled by the producer of the
document.
And the Adobe site says these 'can' be added by LiveCycle - but didn't
state that they HAD to be.
I agree this seems to be Adobe giving with one hand but keeping a firm
grip on the purse strings with the other.
As a follow-up question - would it be possible for FOP to add comments
to a document (with another fo:extension)?
(As my documents are generated from XML I could add comments to the XML
and regenerate.)
I remember doing this with pdfmarks in postscript a few years ago (so I
think it was in PDf 1.3)
- but had a horrible job of getting the alignment and sizing right in a
landscape / rotated page.
Ghostscript and Adobe Distiller had a fundamental disagreement about
rotated media vs. rotated pages.
Mike
Andreas L. Delmelle wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Andreas L. Delmelle [mailto:a_l.delmelle@pandora.be]
>>
>>
>
><snip />
>
>
>>I'm also thinking... Currently FOP 0.20.5 produces PDF conforming
>>to the 1.3 Specification (Acrobat 4.0) --maybe that version still
>>lacks the necessary commands to make it 'commentable' by Reader 7.0
>>(= PDF version 1.6) (? long shot)
>>
>>
>
>Not so long, it seems. Yep! The Adobe Reader 7.0 Help mentions 'additional
>usage rights' which need to be added by Adobe server products --of course
>;-)
>
>AFAICT from the PDF Reference v1.6, these 'additional usage rights' only
>show up in the context of the 'UR' transform method --never mind the
>technical details, this method is closely linked to an entry in the PDF
>document catalog --named 'Perms'-- which was added with PDF v1.5.
>
>Seems like it can be done, but it's going to take some ingenuity, and some
>people with a lot of time on their hands... (as that would mean a rather
>thorough revision of our most current PDF lib, IIC)
>
>And then, there's always the question if Adobe's going to like this
>functionality becoming freely available... (?)
>It does seem to be one of those features that should persuade one to buy
>'Acrobat 7.0 or one of their server products'
>
>
>Greetz,
>
>Andreas
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
>
>
--
Datalucid Limited
8 Eileen Road
South Norwood
London SE25 5EJ
/ tel :0208-239-6810
mob: 0794-725-9760
email: mike.trotman@datalucid.com
/
UK Co. Reg: 4383635
VAT Reg.: 798 7531 60
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.16 - Release Date: 18/04/2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
RE: FOP - -noannotations
Posted by "Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas L. Delmelle [mailto:a_l.delmelle@pandora.be]
<snip />
> I'm also thinking... Currently FOP 0.20.5 produces PDF conforming
> to the 1.3 Specification (Acrobat 4.0) --maybe that version still
> lacks the necessary commands to make it 'commentable' by Reader 7.0
> (= PDF version 1.6) (? long shot)
Not so long, it seems. Yep! The Adobe Reader 7.0 Help mentions 'additional
usage rights' which need to be added by Adobe server products --of course
;-)
AFAICT from the PDF Reference v1.6, these 'additional usage rights' only
show up in the context of the 'UR' transform method --never mind the
technical details, this method is closely linked to an entry in the PDF
document catalog --named 'Perms'-- which was added with PDF v1.5.
Seems like it can be done, but it's going to take some ingenuity, and some
people with a lot of time on their hands... (as that would mean a rather
thorough revision of our most current PDF lib, IIC)
And then, there's always the question if Adobe's going to like this
functionality becoming freely available... (?)
It does seem to be one of those features that should persuade one to buy
'Acrobat 7.0 or one of their server products'
Greetz,
Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
RE: FOP - -noannotations
Posted by "Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Trotman [mailto:mike.trotman@datalucid.com]
>
> Yes - I am opening these in Acrobat Reader 7.0.
>
> I know previous versions of Reader didn't allow adding comments.
> but I know version 7.0 allows adding comments.
Hmm... Have you tried opening any other PDFs with Reader 7.0 to see if this
is the case?
If I find the time, I'll run a few tests *with* encryption, and if necessary
do some further lookup in the PDF Specification to see if I can find
something WRT PDF code that controls this particular document property (esp.
the changes in PDF 1.5 and 1.6)
I'm also thinking... Currently FOP 0.20.5 produces PDF conforming to the 1.3
Specification (Acrobat 4.0) --maybe that version still lacks the necessary
commands to make it 'commentable' by Reader 7.0 (= PDF version 1.6) (? long
shot)
I'll see what I can dig up.
> I wondered about encryption in the binary FOP distribution because the
> DOcs say:
>
> The build process automatically detects JCE presence and installs PDF
> encryption support if possible, otherwise a stub is compiled in.
Could be that the binary was still compiled on a machine without JCE present
(Java 1.3 sans JCE), but I can't confirm it myself. Anyone?
BTW: On top of what Patrick already pointed out --problem with bookmarks--
there is also a known problem when using PDF Encryption in combination with
custom fonts, and a problem with the document properties' values --i.e.
author, producer...-- getting messed up.
Heads-up to all those interested:
It still needs to be fully tested, but IIC, the PDF library in FOP's
development version solves --at least some of-- these issues.
Greetz,
Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: FOP - -noannotations
Posted by Mike Trotman <mi...@datalucid.com>.
Thanks Andreas.
Yes - I am opening these in Acrobat Reader 7.0.
I know previous versions of Reader didn't allow adding comments.
but I know version 7.0 allows adding comments.
I had imagined this could be controlled by normal PDF encryption /
permissions
but maybe you need Adobe LiveCycle to enable that feature - or some
other tool.
I wondered about encryption in the binary FOP distribution because the
DOcs say:
The build process automatically detects JCE presence and installs PDF
encryption support if possible, otherwise a stub is compiled in.
and I don't get the error message:
"Cannot find any provider supporting RC4"
So - I'm wondering - should I build FOP - rather than using a binary
distribution?
And - do I need RC4 or RC5 provider?
The main reason I'm asking - rather than just trying it - is that I am
using FOP in other areas
and want to avoid the possible hassle of breaking it / changing the
documents it provides
or producing many new messages complaining about RC4 providers.
Any further guidance would be welcome.
Mike
Andreas L. Delmelle wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Mike Trotman [mailto:mike.trotman@datalucid.com]
>>
>>
>>
>
>Hi,
>
>
>
>>Does the binary version have PDF encryption enabled?
>>Or - do I have to build FOP from source to activate encryption options?
>>
>>
>
>I think it should work out of the box, if you have JCE --which you have--
>and a provider that offers RC5 encryption --which the default JCE doesn't.
>
>
>
>>According to the documentation the value of allowEditAnnotations is TRUE.
>>and to suppress this you would need the comandline option
>>
>> -noannotations pdf file will be encrypted without edit
>>annotation permission
>>
>>
>>However - any PDFs I produce do not have Commenting enabled - and I wish
>>to enable it.
>>
>>
>
>Different story... I have checked two PDFs produced by FOP 0.20.5 without
>encryption. Commenting was obviously not allowed when I opened these in
>Adobe READER, but it worked fine when I opened them in the full Acrobat.
>
>Could that be your problem?
>
>Greetz,
>
>Andreas
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.16 - Release Date: 18/04/2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
RE: FOP - -noannotations
Posted by "Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Trotman [mailto:mike.trotman@datalucid.com]
>
Hi,
> Does the binary version have PDF encryption enabled?
> Or - do I have to build FOP from source to activate encryption options?
I think it should work out of the box, if you have JCE --which you have--
and a provider that offers RC5 encryption --which the default JCE doesn't.
>
> According to the documentation the value of allowEditAnnotations is TRUE.
> and to suppress this you would need the comandline option
>
> -noannotations pdf file will be encrypted without edit
> annotation permission
>
>
> However - any PDFs I produce do not have Commenting enabled - and I wish
> to enable it.
Different story... I have checked two PDFs produced by FOP 0.20.5 without
encryption. Commenting was obviously not allowed when I opened these in
Adobe READER, but it worked fine when I opened them in the full Acrobat.
Could that be your problem?
Greetz,
Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org