[poppler] Changed renderings due to Annot/Form changes

[Carlos Garcia Campos]

Excerpts from Carlos Garcia Campos's message of dom mar 27 18:28:44 +0200 2011:
> Excerpts from Carlos Garcia Campos's message of dom mar 27 12:44:56 +0200 2011:
[snip]
> > 
> > I've just fixed it in git master, I was ignoring the NeedAppearances
> > entry in AcroForm dict for some cases. It fixes the regression and
> > improves the output, but it still doesn't look like acroread. 
> 
> I think the document is buggy, I'm not sure why it works in acroread
> though, see:
> 
> 13 0 obj
> << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Widget /Rect [0 0 0 0] /T (radioquestion)
> /FT /Btn /Ff 49152 /Kids [ 15 0 R 15 0 R 16 0 R ] /V /2 >>
> endobj
> 
> And we render both annots correctly, but there's a field
> referenced in the Annots array but not in AcroForms nor kids array of
> any form field:
> 
> 14 0 obj
> <</Type /Annot /Subtype /Widget /Rect [42.52 633.35 55.02 645.85] /FT
> /Btn /Contents (þÿ^@r^@a^@d^@i^@o^@q^@u^@e^@s^@t^@i^@o^@n) /P 26 0 R
> /NM (0001-0002) /M (D:20110323184058+01'00') /F 4 /AS /Off /AP << /N
> << /1 35 0 R /Off 36 0 R >> >> /BS << /Type /Border /W 1 /S /I >> /MK
> >> << /BC [ 0.50 0.50 0.50] /BG [ 1.00 1.00 1.00] /CA (l) /IF << /A
> >> [0.50 0.50]>> /TP 0>> /Parent 13 0 R /Ff 49152 /DA (/F3 10.00 Tf
> >> 0.000 0.000 0.000 rg)>>
> endobj
> 
> Since it doesn't have a field associated we simply draw the AP, that's
> the first radio button you can see it's rendered wrongly. I think the
> document is wrong and the first object should contain 14, 15 and 16 as
> kids instead of 15, 15, 16.
> 
> I've also noticed that there are other documents failing now, because
> they have a radio button field whose children are composed field +
> annot dicts containing a DA. In that case we fail to generate the
> appearance stream because we can't find the DA in the radio button
> field, we are assuming the children of a radio button field is an
> annotation, and we ignore any other entries in the dictionary. For
> example:
> 
> 5 0 obj
> <</FT/Btn
> /P 1 0 R
> /Kids[6 0 R 8 0 R 9 0 R ]
> /T(OptionButton)
> /TU<FEFF>
> /Ff 32768
> /V /1
> /DV /1
> >>
> endobj
> 
> This is the radio button, it doesn't have a DA, but look at one of the
> children:
> 
> 6 0 obj
> <</Type/Annot/Subtype/Widget/F 4
> /Rect[237.7 765.7 248 775.6]
> /FT/Btn
> /P 1 0 R
> /Parent 5 0 R
> /TU<FEFF>
> /DR<</Font<</ZaDb 18 0 R/HelvReg 17 0 R>>>>
> /DA(0 0 0 rg /ZaDb 0 Tf)
> /MK<</CA(l)>>
> /AP<<
> /N<< /1 22 0 R /Off 23 0 R>>
> >>
> /AS /1
> >>
> endobj
> 
> It's a composed dict (field + annot) but we are assuming that form
> fields having children that look like annotation dicts are terminal
> fields, so we create a widget from this annot, but we ignore all other
> entries, like DA in this case. Without the DA we fail to create an
> appearance stream for the widget annotation.
> 
> I'm working on this already, but I'm afraid it will take some time,
> since I have to re-think the way we build the fields tree. We are also
> ignoring container fields (non-terminal fields that have non-terminal
> children). 

I've just pushed a patch to fix these issues, it works for all
documents I have, if you find any problem, please let me know. 

Thanks, 
-- 
Carlos Garcia Campos
PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x523E6462
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/poppler/attachments/20110403/0e5ad390/attachment-0001.pgp>