Thread View: adobe.postscript.programming
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by Andrew_Peatling
Mon, 28 Jun 2004 04:11
~> End Marker
Author: Andrew_Peatling
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 04:11
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 04:11
15 lines
1514 bytes
1514 bytes
The Postscript Reference Manual states that the > must immediately follow the ~ in a postscript output BUT it also states that white space characters e.g. carriage returns should be ignored. Our application (SAP R/3) produces files where very occasionally the ~ is the 80th character on the line and hence a carriage return is between the ~ and the subsequent >. Depending upon how you interpret the reference manual this is either acceptable or not. I really need a black and white answer form Adobe on this one to resolve whether Konica or SAP need to resolve this issue. Adobe Reader certainly handles this character placement correctly as do HP printers but Konica printers need the carriage return removed. Any help much appreciated Regards Andrew Peatling andrew.peatling@adesisolutions.com +61 419962247
Re: ~> End Marker
Author: Aandi_Inston
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 08:52
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 08:52
43 lines
2801 bytes
2801 bytes
>I really need a black and white answer form Adobe on this one to resolve whether Konica or SAP need to resolve this issue. You will certainly not get an official reply, if the Konica printer includes a non-Adobe PostScript interepreter. Adobe don't see it as their role to police, improve or comment on non-Adobe interpreters. (In my personal opinion, it suits Adobe very well if non-Adobe interpreters differ from Adobe, since it helps build the "true Adobe" brand idea in PostScripts, sometimes to the point where it becomes a purchasing decision). > >Adobe Reader certainly handles this character placement correctly as do HP printers but Konica printers need the carriage return removed. The solution here depends on your outlook, not on the finer points of PostScript theology. Getting printers "fixed" is a difficult and sometimes impossible task, whatever bugs they might have. (Printers may contain non-upgradeable softwre). Getting software fixed, even if it is to work around printer bugs, may be a simpler solution, as compatibility with a wide range of printing devices is an aim for software vendors. (So my personal recommendation would be to contact SAP and tell them, not the letter of the PostScript reference, but that their files don't print on particular hardware). Since I enjoy a bit of PostScript theology myself I took a look at the specification. I don't find a definitive statement, but I see "enclosed in <~ and ~>". My personal interpretation of this is that ~> aren't implicitly given permission to be split. There are other strange effects with spaces (e.g. is "/ a" the literal name a, an error, or a literal empty name followed by the executable name a, but I digress). In the few cases where the PostScript spec is ambiguous, one could argue that the job of those creating PostScript is to be conservative, and those consuming it is to be liberal. You of course have the opposite in this situation. For what it's worth, in my own interpreter (i.e. the one I wrote), a split ~> will generate a syntaxerror. Aandi Inston
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads