Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Table 5 confusion if Length is optional when F key is present #10

Closed
petervwyatt opened this issue Jan 1, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed
Labels
ISO approved Resolved issue approved by ISO

Comments

@petervwyatt
Copy link
Member

In ISO 32000-2:2020, "Table 5 — Entries common to all stream dictionaries" states that Length is a required key.

The F key is then described as "(Optional; PDF 1.2) The file containing the stream data. If this entry is present, the bytes between stream and endstream shall be ignored. However, the Length entry should still specify the number of those bytes (usually, there are no bytes and Length is 0). The filters that are applied to the file data shall be specified by FFilter and the filter parameters shall be specified by FDecodeParms."

In this text it says Length "should still specify..." but if Length is really mandatory then it "shall specify...".
Or Length is optional when F is present.

I personally think /Length is always required so the correct fix is "should" to "shall" in the description of F.

@petervwyatt petervwyatt added the bug Something isn't working label Jan 1, 2021
@lrosenthol
Copy link
Collaborator

Agreed. Length is always required and should->shall

@petervwyatt
Copy link
Member Author

Proposed solution: reword second sentence as "However, the Length entry shall still specify the number of those bytes (usually, there are no bytes and Length is 0)."

@petervwyatt petervwyatt added the proposed solution Proposed solution is ready for review label Jan 4, 2021
@MPBailey
Copy link
Collaborator

I wonder how many files out there will be invalidated by this ... but you could make a good case that they're already invalid anyway, so I'm not going to lose sleep. +1

@petervwyatt petervwyatt added ISO submitted Resolved issue submitted to ISO for approval and removed bug Something isn't working proposed solution Proposed solution is ready for review labels Dec 6, 2021
@petervwyatt petervwyatt added this to the ISO Submission Feb 2022 milestone Dec 6, 2021
@petervwyatt petervwyatt added ISO approved Resolved issue approved by ISO and removed ISO submitted Resolved issue submitted to ISO for approval labels Apr 27, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ISO approved Resolved issue approved by ISO
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants