Re: [NTG-context] Widget and mandatory Rect field?
On 18-4-2011 7:31, Reviczky, Adam wrote: Hi I have a PDF with widgets and everything's fine with it, and I'm testing it by opening it with Adobe Reader. Now I had a look again with other viewers and when I open it with evince (poppler based), then it gives me some strange errors like this: Error: Annotation rectangle is wrong type Though it opens it fine and no problems at all. there can also be a puzzling FormFieldButton::setState called on a readOnly field I googled a bit and found a bug report on this: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29954 There it is said that its ConTeXt's fault, as It has a Widget annotation without the mandatory Rect field. Is it really so? I couldn't find any threads on this on the list. \nopdfcompression \setupinteraction[state=start] \definefieldbody[email][type=line] \starttext \startTEXpage \fieldbody[email] \par \fieldbody[email] \stopTEXpage \stoptext gives 17 0 obj /Type /Annot /Q 0 /Subtype /Widget /Parent 16 0 R /DA (/rmtf 11.9552 Tf 1.1955 Ts 0 0 0 rg 0 0 0 RG) /MK /CA () /F 4 /Rect [0 14.4275 59.7758 26.3827] endobj 18 0 obj /Type /Annot /Q 0 /Subtype /Widget /Parent 16 0 R /DA (/rmtf 11.9552 Tf 1.1955 Ts 0 0 0 rg 0 0 0 RG) /MK /CA () /F 4 /Rect [0 0 59.7758 11.9552] endobj which look like Annot's with Rect's to me. There is a parent field 16 0 obj /Q 0 /Subtype /Widget /T feff0065006d00610069006c /F 4 /Kids 15 0 R /V feff /DV feff /Ff 0 /MaxLen 1024 /FT /Tx /DA (/rmtf 11.9552 Tf 1.1955 Ts 0 0 0 rg 0 0 0 RG) endobj but it's not an annot (just a container for shared data). (Actually children can have different rectangles so it would not make sense to share one). Can someone confirm this, can this be even fixed? Are you saying that Evince does forms (and Javascript as it's associated) or is it checking something that is not interpreted anyway? Officially a viewer should ignore annots that it cannot handle. Anyhow, in context we've always had such widgets implemented using a parent / child model and it's the child that matters for rendering (and it definitely has a Rect as it's an Annot) while the parent is just a dictionary and not an annot (one can argue that the Subtype key is not needed there but - at least in the past - it had to be there.) BTW, I'm currently playing with the luatex epdf interface (under construction and being cleaned up for 0.70) and I noticed the same message. Interesting is that there are such widget tests in popler but at the same time more important tests (arrays getting out of bounds leading to crashes) are not there. But Hartmut is working on getting that all fixed in the luatex variant (interface) eventually. The mentioned message probably have to be intercepted as well and be fed into the regular message system. So, unless I'm sure what (and if something) is wrong I'll do nothing. (Acrobat preflights the document all right and some widgets types are too instable to mess with too much anyway.) Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl - ___ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Widget and mandatory Rect field?
17 0 obj /Type /Annot /Q 0 /Subtype /Widget /Parent 16 0 R /DA (/rmtf 11.9552 Tf 1.1955 Ts 0 0 0 rg 0 0 0 RG) /MK /CA () /F 4 /Rect [0 14.4275 59.7758 26.3827] endobj 18 0 obj /Type /Annot /Q 0 /Subtype /Widget /Parent 16 0 R /DA (/rmtf 11.9552 Tf 1.1955 Ts 0 0 0 rg 0 0 0 RG) /MK /CA () /F 4 /Rect [0 0 59.7758 11.9552] endobj which look like Annot's with Rect's to me. There is a parent field I was puzzled by this too, but apparently its the parent where the error message is thrown out (rightly or falsely). Are you saying that Evince does forms (and Javascript as it's associated) or is it checking something that is not interpreted anyway? Officially a viewer should ignore annots that it cannot handle. Evince does forms by now, at least to some extent, without JavaScript of course. I've tested this: http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Acrobat/9.0/Samples/interactiveform_enabled.pdf which gives me a Unimplemented annotation: POPPLER_ANNOT_LINE, please post a bug report in Evince bugzilla (http://bugzilla.gnome.org) with a testcase. So there must be some checking. Anyhow, in context we've always had such widgets implemented using a parent / child model and it's the child that matters for rendering (and it definitely has a Rect as it's an Annot) while the parent is just a dictionary and not an annot (one can argue that the Subtype key is not needed there but - at least in the past - it had to be there.) Sounds fair enough, and I'm not complaining :). So, unless I'm sure what (and if something) is wrong I'll do nothing. (Acrobat preflights the document all right and some widgets types are too instable to mess with too much anyway.) That's fine, and as long as its working I don't really care. Hans Cheers Adam ___ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
[NTG-context] Widget and mandatory Rect field?
Hi I have a PDF with widgets and everything's fine with it, and I'm testing it by opening it with Adobe Reader. Now I had a look again with other viewers and when I open it with evince (poppler based), then it gives me some strange errors like this: Error: Annotation rectangle is wrong type Though it opens it fine and no problems at all. I googled a bit and found a bug report on this: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29954 There it is said that its ConTeXt's fault, as It has a Widget annotation without the mandatory Rect field. Is it really so? I couldn't find any threads on this on the list. Can someone confirm this, can this be even fixed? Adam PS: As there's an attached PDF on the bug report, but with mkii, I'm attaching a minimal mkiv PDF (widget.pdf), if that helps. made with: %%% \setupinteraction[state=start] \setuppagenumbering[location=] \starttext \definefieldbody[email][type=line] \fieldbody[email] \stoptext %%% widget.pdf Description: widget.pdf ___ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
