Re: [Tockit-general] New Docco test version
Brought to you by:
jhereth,
peterbecker
From: Peter B. <pe...@pe...> - 2004-04-06 14:33:42
|
Bastian Wormuth wrote: >Tuesday, April 06, 2004, 2:04:26 AM, you wrote: > >PB> Bastian Wormuth wrote: > >PB> First test I did was running against the ICFCA04 CD. I got 3/4 hits, the >PB> ToscanaJ manual failed. There seems to be some problem with the OOo >PB> PDFs, even though the Elba manual worked. I attached some stuff to this >PB> bug in PDFbox: >PB> - >PB> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=860027&group_id=78314&atid=552832 > >PB> I could reproduce the problem with the BIS example, though. >PB> Unfortunately it is a feature, not a bug -- see the last entry for 0.6.3 >PB> on this list: >PB> - http://www.csh.rit.edu/~ben/projects/pdfbox/news.html > >PB> Acrobat Reader disallows copying text out of these documents, too -- >PB> although it does allow text selection, whatever that is good for if you >PB> can't copy it. > >PB> So this is actually correct behaviour. Not that I really want it, though >PB> :-( But I don't think I want to hack PDFbox either -- which shouldn't be >PB> too hard (a diff between the source of 0.6.2 and 0.6.3 would most likely >PB> help a lot), but while I disagree with this type of secretiveness, I >PB> still think we should respect that. > >... mmmh, so what to do ? PDFbox disallows copying text, but that's >not what we want, we just want to search for some text. Isn't there >any way around it ? Or couldn't we just use the old version ? > > These particular PDFs are encoded in a way that text is not supposed to be extracted -- neither by copy&paste nor by tools. It seems the old PDFbox ignored that, the new one respects this. Of course there is most likely a way around it, but I don't think it is important at the moment -- and I won't remove the old plugin, which you can still use. One thing I should do is adding better feedback, though. At the moment you have to hack the run-docco.bat and turn the javaw call into java, then check the output on the command line. Not nice, but I don't think I'll fix that in this version. Peter |