Martin Edge wrote: > Hey Guys, Hi Martin,
<snip/> > Up till now, this has served me well, and larger commercial printers have no > quams in dealing with the output. However, today, whilst trying to print on > our FujiXerox ApeosPort 650I (I'd say a SME sized printer) - the duplex > functions were not working correctly. > > This turned out to be because the printer is finicky enough to have a > problem if on the reverse side of a duplex set, the PageSize is defined, it > ignores the request completely. I found if I remove the offending Page Size > (and other codes I may have added), the process works. Actually this problem is not only limited to the Printer model you mention. I have encountered this behaviour on about 50% of all PS Printers. To solve this problem we added an option to FOP to only put entries into the pagedevice dictionary, such as the /PageSize entry, when they change. This option is rather cryptically named dsc-compliant. If you add the following element to the PS Renderer section of fop.xconf you should find that duplex starts working again! <dsc-compliant>false</dsc-compliant> Thanks, Chris > > This is the offending section: > %FOPBeginSetPageDevice > << > /PageSize [595 842] > /ImagingBBox null >>> setpagedevice > %FOPEndSetPageDevice > > So; if I attempt to remove the width/height attributes from the page > definition within the page sequence, as per below; > <page index="0" name="1" page-master-name="basicPage" width="595275" > height="841889"> > > The FOP parser gets narky with me and talks about a number format exception > ( I assume translating the lack of width/height to output ): > > javax.xml.transform.TransformerException: java.lang.NumberFormatException: > null > at > org.apache.fop.cli.InputHandler.transformTo(InputHandler.java:302) > at > org.apache.fop.cli.IFInputHandler.renderTo(IFInputHandler.java:77) > at org.apache.fop.cli.Main.startFOP(Main.java:174) > at org.apache.fop.cli.Main.main(Main.java:205) > Caused by: javax.xml.transform.TransformerException: > java.lang.NumberFormatException > > So, the rhetorical part of the question is - is it worth trying to modify > FOP (and would I have my fingers removed) to deal with the lack of a > width/height in the transformer to Postscript, or am I forced to write a > secondary post processor on the PostScript file to look for a duplex, and > then remove those lines for the following page? > > Hopefully, this makes sense. > > Thanks > Martin > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
