| | <<<Back 1 day (to 2016/11/09) | 20161110 |
| sebras | Robin: OCCG -> OCG in commit messagtE? | 16:41.21 |
| Robin_Watts | OCCG -> OCCD :) | 16:41.46 |
| sebras | Obsessive-Compulsive Computer Disorder? | 16:42.18 |
| Robin_Watts | Optional Content Configuration Dictionary. | 16:42.34 |
| | :) | 16:42.44 |
| sebras | ah, now I know the second C. | 16:42.59 |
| Robin_Watts | Updated commit online. | 16:43.15 |
| sebras | Robin_Watts: "in this file" -> "in this document" in the header. | 16:44.01 |
| Robin_Watts | Updated commit online. | 16:45.12 |
| sebras | Robin_Watts: did you omit commenting _is_hidden conciously or is it a mistake? | 16:47.31 |
| | Robin_Watts: normal radiobuttons cannot be deselected. there is always one option chosen. do the OCG radiobuttons work the same? | 16:50.09 |
| Robin_Watts | sebras: Good question. | 16:50.26 |
| | Currently my code WILL allow you to deselect a radiobutton. | 16:50.39 |
| | But I can change that if required. | 16:50.50 |
| | Let me test in acrobat. | 16:50.54 |
| | Acrobat allows deselection. | 16:55.11 |
| | Hmm. Rereading the spec I have the RBGroups inheritance wrong. Will fix. | 16:55.43 |
| sebras | Robin_Watts: there are more OCCG in pdf-xref.c | 16:58.58 |
| Robin_Watts | sebras: Thanks. | 16:59.37 |
| sebras | Robin_Watts: how does usage an intent correlate? | 17:01.15 |
| Robin_Watts | sebras: Urgh. | 17:01.26 |
| sebras | Robin_Watts: ok. I'll go read the spec first. | 17:01.35 |
| Robin_Watts | See my answer to fredross-perry in the logs last night :) | 17:01.36 |
| | The spec is REALLY horrible. | 17:01.47 |
| | Usage = "View", "Print", "Export". | 17:01.56 |
| | It's "what you are doing with the file" (viewing it, printing it, exporting to something that doesn't support layers) | 17:02.24 |
| | As such Usage is something that the caller can be expected to set (in the absence of any information otherwise, we use View). | 17:02.57 |
| sebras | seems reasonable as that's the default value according to spec. | 17:03.24 |
| Robin_Watts | Intent is something hairier. Each OCG can say which Intents it is for. | 17:03.31 |
| | Intents can be View or Design. | 17:03.41 |
| | PDF 1.5 says "or others to be defined" | 17:03.51 |
| | PDF 2.0 says "nope, just those two". | 17:03.59 |
| | Intent can also be "All" (which means either View or Design) | 17:04.16 |
| | When you pick an OCCD, that sets the Intent. | 17:04.40 |
| sebras | Robin_Watts: represented by the empty array? | 17:04.47 |
| Robin_Watts | hence OCGs can appear differently according to what Intent is in use. | 17:05.09 |
| | Intent appears to offer an additional layer of on/offness on top of the normal selection stuff. | 17:05.30 |
| | All is represented by "All" | 17:05.44 |
| | empty intent means View. | 17:05.53 |
| | I find Intent... odd. | 17:06.08 |
| sebras | Robin_Watts: I'm reading the note on page 369 in pdfref17.pdf | 17:06.12 |
| | the first note on that page. | 17:06.24 |
| Robin_Watts | I would not be surprised to find there is stuff not quite right about this, but until I can see an example that shows a problem, I don't propose to worry. | 17:06.40 |
| | sebras: Right. In the OCCD empty array means "All". | 17:07.31 |
| | But... see Table 4.5.1 | 17:08.43 |
| | on poage 376. | 17:08.47 |
| | The spec is a mess here. | 17:09.13 |
| sebras | I need to read the spec a bit more before really reviewing this. | 17:10.32 |
| sebras | brings pdfref17 to bed. | 17:10.44 |
| Robin_Watts | This'll both put you to sleep and give you nightmares :) | 17:11.03 |
| | tor8, sebras: New commits on robin/master | 18:38.25 |
| | tor8, sebras: And another one to fix building the java JNI code under windows. | 18:55.34 |
| | Forward 1 day (to 2016/11/11)>>> | |
Log of #ghostscript at irc.freenode.net.