Issue 17335 - Adobe's attempts to convert exported PDF to tagged PDF fail
Summary: Adobe's attempts to convert exported PDF to tagged PDF fail
Status: CLOSED NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE
Alias: None
Product: gsl
Classification: Code
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: OOo 1.1 RC
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: christof.pintaske
QA Contact: issues@gsl
URL:
Keywords:
: 20475 20824 (view as issue list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-07-24 02:18 UTC by rri0189
Modified: 2003-11-19 17:55 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---


Attachments
Sample PDF file that fails to convert (40.56 KB, application/octet-stream)
2003-07-24 02:18 UTC, rri0189
no flags Details
Original sxw file (10.71 KB, application/octet-stream)
2003-07-24 02:19 UTC, rri0189
no flags Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description rri0189 2003-07-24 02:18:10 UTC
A PDF created by OOo 1.1 RC1 is not a tagged PDF; that is an issue for an RFE.
This, however, is a bug: the Windows component of Adobe Acrobat Reader for Palm
OS 2.0 attempts to convert it to a tagged PDF anyway, and produces the following
error:

Error converting to tagged PDF: Could not read page structure (bad page contents)[1]
Comment 1 rri0189 2003-07-24 02:18:51 UTC
Created attachment 7988 [details]
Sample PDF file that fails to convert
Comment 2 rri0189 2003-07-24 02:19:36 UTC
Created attachment 7989 [details]
Original sxw file
Comment 3 christof.pintaske 2003-07-24 13:55:54 UTC
sorry, I cannot find any error. As the PalmOS converter states during
the conversion: It might not be able to convert all valid PDF
documents. That's what actually seems to happen. If you think this is
an error, then please provide more information which PDF features need
to be supported to make the PalmOS converter happy.
Comment 4 rri0189 2003-07-24 15:31:44 UTC
It's not saying, "Sorry, this is one of those PDF files that I warned
you I might not be able to handle"; it's saying "Error" and "could not
read page structure" and "bad page contents" -- which wording rather
suggests to me that, according to Adobe's analysis, the file is not
merely inadequate, but downright broken.
Comment 5 philipp.lohmann 2003-07-24 15:59:46 UTC
I'd say it cannot be that bad a PDF file as Adobe's Acrobat Reader as
well as ghostscript and xpdf can display the file flawlessly. I must
say i don't quite understand that error message as the document has a
valid page tree; what it does not have is the structure information
that would belong into tagged PDF (which OOo currently does not
produce, no doubt).
Comment 6 christof.pintaske 2003-07-25 09:41:20 UTC
As already said: If you think this is an error, then please provide
more information which PDF features need to be supported to make the
PalmOS converter happy.

Comment 7 rri0189 2003-08-22 18:47:55 UTC
I entered a separate issue the same day asking for tagged-PDF format
to be supported.  But I don't think it looks good -- to say the least
-- that an Adobe product is saying that the file is not only
inadequate, but actually broken.  I know nothing of PDF internals, so
I can't really help more than that.

It's especially troublesome because, thanks to a _third_ issue I've
raised, export as AportisDoc doesn't work right either.  (And there's
a fourth issue, not mine, pointing out that the AportisDoc Reader is a
dead product anyway, even though it continues to be OOo's officially
targeted solution for PDA support.)

So, right now, trying to get an OOo document onto a PalmOS PDA is a
real bang-your-head-against-the-wall experience, while, in the
meantime, there's a third-party PalmOS program, reputed to be
excellent, for handling (both reading and writing) MS Office documents
-- but which I don't have, and don't know for certain will work with
OOo imports and exports either.
Comment 8 christof.pintaske 2003-09-05 15:39:49 UTC
sorry, I can't see what we could do here.
Comment 9 christof.pintaske 2003-09-08 12:20:08 UTC
closing
Comment 10 christof.pintaske 2003-09-30 18:04:14 UTC
*** Issue 20475 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 11 christof.pintaske 2003-10-07 10:53:30 UTC
*** Issue 20824 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 12 philipp.lohmann 2003-11-19 17:55:58 UTC
FYI: we have worked out with Adobe's help what the actual problem is
and will build in a workaround for the problem. The new issue for that
is issue 22452.