rokicki@polya.Stanford.EDU (Tomas G. Rokicki) (11/23/89)
After seeing yet another sample of *lousy* PostScript generated by an application (this one Windows Designer), I'm very upset. This particular application makes *no* effort to comply with any structuring conventions. It even generates an unprotected call to `a4'. I get numerous bug reports---90% of the distill down to problems with the application generating the PostScript. What I propose is that Adobe (or some enlightened soul) attempt to write a `validation' program. This simple C program would read in a PostScript graphic following the structuring conventions and generate another, with the included graphic scaled and rotated to perhaps halfsize in the middle of the page. The output PostScript would also have drawn some things before and after the included graphics. And this C program would parse and check the input graphic appropriately. Then, if an Application claimed to generate `PostScript', especially for potential inclusion in other programs, its generated output should be capable of being sucessfully filtered and scaled by the above C program. This C program should be fairly simple and thus portable, and would be a tremendous boon to those attempting to support products that include PostScript images; by simply running the program above with a troublesome graphic, the fault could be quickly isolated. In addition, this C program could serve as the basis for an application's PostScript importing code, showing things done correctly. I'm sick of dealing with Adobe's poorly written and changing structuring conventions, and even more so with applications that don't make even an effort to comply. Comments or thoughts?
spage@cup.portal.com (S spage Page) (11/24/89)
>> [ Need a PostScript verification/test tool. ]
I agree entirely. I use Aldus Freehand to produce diagrams for insertion in
Word 5.0 for the PC, using IBM-format EPS as the import mechanism. This works
fine most of the time, but every 30th diagram crashes the printer with
savelevel problems. Or only some of the PostScript is incorporated. Or
nothing appears. Naturally, each company blames the other. I'm considering
buying another high-end package (Lotus Manuscript?) just to have a third
party to check EPS files against.
Adobe bears a lot of the responsibility for the successful use of its
files as interchange standards, and they should shoulder that burdern by
providing developers and sophisticated users with appropriate tools, test
programs and utilities. Aldus is in a similar situation with the TIFF
spec, and you can download a package of C code and a dump program from
Compu$erve if you're having problems with TIFF. (And boy, can you have
problems with TIFF!)
It would help if the user community identified programs which output good
or bad PostScript. We'll never get this information from software reviews
(can you imagine "professional" reviewers even looking at a PostScript output
file??). Here are my two cents:
Word 5.0 for the PC: a joke. Uses exitserver, not conformant, no
optimization.
Aldus Freehand: generally excellent. Simple, readable output. Includes
its whole header even if the file doesn't need all the routines.
=S Page