I did not intentionally change those elements, but I am noticing that the fonts come up sharper in the 'fixed' version. It took some time to discover why the files could not be opened / were crashing other pdf editors. Initially, I copy and pasted working elements from pdfs that were opening correctly and replacing the parts that came up seemingly "damaged" when I opened them with Open Office (Sun pdf importer extension) Until I found I could not replicate the blue logo at the bottom with the same color. By some luck / guessing I right clicked in an area where there should have been an element and a new context menu item came up that said "close object". When I did that, the seemingly missing object reappeared. I went through the rest of the case studies and applied the same change and then exported them. Open Office imports pdf to svg/odg, so that translation may have had an effect. From your example, the color range appears improved and the fonts appear sharper. I had not intended on that change, but I hope it is an improvement, albeit an unintentional one on my part.
When I did the copy/paste, I adjusted the elements using the exact coordinates from the properties given by the "damaged" ones. I checked to ensure that the elements rendered exactly the same way after exporting the files, so there my methodology for correcting those issues did change, but at the time I saw no noticeable effect. One issue as mentioned in some of the other bug reports, it is obvious that these files were created with the proprietary Adobe Acrobat. It is a known issue that Adobe Acrobat, while producing files that render correctly, they do not follow the published specification as implemented in open source alternatives. This is why a pdf file created in Adobe Acrobat can crash software such as Inkscape and pdfedit. In my humble opinion, the slight unintentional changes that bring the document to compliance with the open source specification are reasonable, and the benefits ideal. There was a certain irony to the difficulty in fixing these problems. Would people generally agree? Were there any other unintentional changes I may have over looked? Given that I have spent the better part of two days getting up to speed with this whole bug / patching issue, I would really like to get it perfect. -- 2 Typos in case_Wellcome.pdf https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/342362 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
