[poppler] PDF 2.0 Spec

[Leonard Rosenthol]

>> But of course it's a draft so one would not want to use it as 
>> definitive answer.
> 
> But isn't this somewhat true even for the final version? Meaning that 
> it will never be the definite answer as we will always look at other 
> implementations or decide on our own that a document maybe formally 
> incorrect or outright broken, but we still want to support it because 
> our users want us to?

One of the goals of the PDF 2.0 committee was to actually make it a (more) definitive document.  We looked at areas where implementations differed, reviewed the options and agreed on a single choice of implementation.  Not everything - there are still areas where processors can go their own way, but they are less...


>We can support "broken" documents, that's fine imo. Additionally, if we have the standard at hand, we can cite some place and tell the bug reporter "please give your composer vendor a hint to fix it at their side too", just to improve the world a little bit:) 
>
Absolutely!!


Leonard