Hey Chris,

thanks for the info.

f1040--2008.pdf has the same issues with evince, probably that's related to
the way it was created.
but the newer versions 2009-2013 works pretty fine.

Cheers,
althaser


On 23 September 2014 19:54, Chris Knadle <chris.kna...@coredump.us> wrote:

> On Monday, September 22, 2014 08:28:45 Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > On 09/21/2014 01:29 PM, Pedro Beja wrote:
> > > should we reassign this bug to okular now?
> > >
> > > because the evince version works as expected since upstream fixed it.
> >
> > I just tested with evince 3.12.2-1 and okular 4:4.14.0-2
> >
> > evince does work as expected.
> >
> > okular loads f1040.pdf (from the 2013 tax year) with a yellow banner
> > that says:
> >
> > ---------
> > This document has XFA forms, which are currently *unsupported*
> >                                              [Show forms] [x]
> > ---------
> >
> > clicking the "Show forms" button does indeed produce functional checkbox
> > UI elements that appear to work (and textentry UI elements where there
> > are textentries).  Printing the file to a PDF from okular after checking
> > some of these boxes and filling in some textarea elements produces a
> > formless PDF with my filled in responses.
> >
> > so i think (despite okular's warning banner) both evince and okular are
> > doing the right thing here now.
> >
> >       --dkg
>
> I'm adding additional info (without reopening the bug).
>
> I just tested okular 4:4.14.1-1 using the f1040 PDF form from several
> years.
> For the year 2008 okular does not print information put into the fill-in
> form,
> but it /does/ for the f1040 for later years.  I think this means there is a
> fundamental difference in the f1040--2008.pdf than for newer years.
>
>    http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/f1040--2008.pdf
>
> [Change the year in the URL above to get the form for other years.]
>
> But regardless since Okular seems to work for newer years than 2008 it
> seems
> to me like this bug can be considered fixed.
>
> Thanks.
>
>   -- Chris
>
> --
>
> Chris Knadle
> chris.kna...@coredump.us
>

Reply via email to