Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-fop-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 99187 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 17:58:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2004 17:58:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 52605 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2004 17:58:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-xml-fop-user-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 52389 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2004 17:58:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact fop-user-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: fop-user@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list fop-user@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 52376 invoked by uid 99); 9 Jul 2004 17:58:06 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [213.159.130.68] (HELO mail.online.ie) (213.159.130.68) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Jul 2004 10:58:03 -0700 Received: from [213.84.76.41] (helo=pcwouter) by mail.online.ie with asmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BizdJ-0000BI-Mr for fop-user@xml.apache.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2004 18:58:01 +0100 Message-ID: <015801c465de$45f78150$9600000a@pcwouter> From: "Wouter de Vaal" To: References: <200407080719.i687JXKE024199@mail.medata.com> Subject: Re: PDF->PS->PDF with EPS Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 19:57:55 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi Maestro, The bug you asked for is commited and the information you posted below looks correct to me. I hope this clears up some stuff (but I even hope more that in FOP 1.0 the eps's will allways show op in acrobat programs ;-). Cheers, Wouter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clay Leeds" To: Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 5:59 PM Subject: Re: PDF->PS->PDF with EPS > Wouter, > > FWIW, I would like to add that I've actually changed the graphics page > already (I haven't COMMITTED the changes so you won't see them on the > site yet). Please read the changes below, and help me make certain it > adequately addresses the issue. I'm posting the entire EPS section > below (the main addition is the new item toward the > bottom--does anything else need to be changed?): > >
> EPS >

FOP provides support for two output targets:

>
    >
  • PostScript (full support).
  • >
  • > PDF (partial support). Due to the lack of a built-in PostScript > interpreter, FOP > can only embed the EPS file into the PDF. Acrobat Reader will not > currently display > the EPS (it doesn't have a PostScript interpreter, either) but it > will be shown > correctly when you print the PDF on a PostScript-capable printer. > PostScript devices > (including href="http://www.ghostscript.com/">GhostScript) will render the > EPS correctly. >
  • >
> When using href="http://www.ghostscript.com/">GhostScript to display inline > EPS, it has been href="http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=108912901400002&r=1&w=2">reported > that more recent versions have problems rendering inline EPS. > Therefore it is recommended to use href="http://www.ghostscript.com/doc/gnu/gnu706.htm">Ghostscript > 7.06. If anyone has a solution to this problem, please send an > e-mail to the FOP-User href="http://xml.apache.org/fop/maillist.html">mailing > list. >

> Other output targets can't be supported at the moment because > FOP lacks a PostScript interpreter. >

>
> > I would also like to add, that my reason for asking Wouter to create a > Bugzilla entry also deals with the fact that it would be nice to 'fix' > the underlying problem (not just document it! :-D), and if we don't > have a bugzilla report, it might not end up on our 'radar'... > > Thanks in advance for reporting this and any help you can provide! > > Web Maestro Clay > > On Jul 8, 2004, at 7:25 AM, Clay Leeds wrote: > > On Jul 8, 2004, at 12:08 AM, Wouter de Vaal wrote: > >> Thanx! We switched from 8.11 to 7.06 and it also works with us now! > >> > >> Maybe something to add on the site? > >> > >> Regards, > >> Wouter de Vaal > > > > Would you please file a BUG in bugzilla[1] so this issue can be > > tracked? It would help if you could test using other versions of > > Ghostscript, and include that information in your report. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Web Maestro Clay > > > > [1] > > http://xml.apache.org/fop/bugs.html > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-user-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: fop-user-help@xml.apache.org > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-user-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: fop-user-help@xml.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-user-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: fop-user-help@xml.apache.org