To redevelop something that worked before to look exactly the same
because HP dropped their own format? No, no budget yet no sense of
futility either. :)
I've set this to do the font bitmapping, not sure that it's working as
the font sizes aren't right, but they don't overlap so much:
conf/fop.xconf:
...
renderer mime=application/vnd.hp-PCL
!-- render all text as bitmaps using Java 2D --
text-renderingbitmap/text-rendering
/renderer
It looks the same as the PDF version on other printers though, so I
can't reproduce it personally ...
I'll try to get an example.
Regards,
Roland
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Quite a bit of work, what you suggest here. PCL 6 (aka PCL XL) is
a completely different printer language compared to PCL 5. We'd have to
develop a completely new renderer. Do you have a budget for this? ;-)
What does that mean: better, but still not adequate? Does it print
correctly on those printers or not? What's the problem?
On 31.07.2007 08:48:08 Roland Neilands wrote:
I suggest PCL6 support.
A late response I know, but this just came up recently I can't work
around it.
PCL 5 support is being dropped from some new printers it seems:
http://h2.www2.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c00878487/c00878487.pdf
This has happened a couple of times recently, the printers don't have
usable postscript support, and bitmapping the fonts in 0.93 sadly didn't
resolve the issue (better, but still not adequate).
It remains for me to say buy another printer. I wonder how long that
answer will fly?
Regards,
Roland
Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
Hi all
As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the
process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to
gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see
incorporated in FOP 0.94.
Note that the release will already contain some cool new features
compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse=collapse,
auto-detection and -registration of available custom fonts and
improvements in handling internal destinations...
What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like
table-layout=auto, which we are well aware is still missing), but
more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could
mean a great deal to you.
So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be
dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the
suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will definitely
keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release.
We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a
position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release
branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked
anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up
in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very
much if these are uncovered before the actual release.
As always, we value your input and feedback.
Thanks
Andreas
(*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
