|
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Product | |||||||||||||||||||
| Support | |||||||||||||||||||
| Everything Else | |||||||||||||||||||
| Picture Field Support Survey | |||||||||||||||||||
| Background |
While working on entering and displaying pictures, we ran into a major obstacle. It seems there is no longer any good way to create a PICT from the Clipboard under OS X. The OS X Clipboard (aka Pasteboard) uses PDF data as its default exchange format. While the OS contains quite a bit of support for converting PICT formated objects into PDF formated objects — for example to display them on the screen — there appears to be no way to convert a PDF object (copied to the clipboard from another application) into a PICT object. The obvious solution is move ahead and store new pasted picture data as PDF data. Under this scenario, new pictures pasted into picture fields from Helix applications running natively in OS X will be stored in the PDF format. (Pre-existing data can still be stored as PICT and viewed normally in OS X.) One serious problem with this approach is that we must maintain compatibility with the Classic Client (and RADE) for at least one release. Getting Classic to understand the PDF formated objects is a non-trivial project that would slow us down considerably. Therefore, our best plan is for the Classic Client to simply ignore Picture field data stored in PDF format. If we do that, pictures pasted into Picture fields through an OS X Client or Engine will not be visible when the record is viewed in Classic Client or RADE. While we really don't like this idea, it seems to be the best choice, in that it moves us forward technologically and it gets an OS X Engine and Client into your hands faster. This discussion only affects Picture fields. Document fields, and data pasted into rectangled on templates continue to work fine on all systems. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Time Frame | This survey ran Sept 26 – Oct 16, 2006. |
||||||||||||||||||
| The Question | How Severe Will The Impact Be For You If We Switch To PDF Format? | ||||||||||||||||||
| The Results |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Selected Comments From Responses |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| A Note on Confused Comments |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| The Impact |
These are the known facts:
Based on the survey results, the expected scenario is:
*Note: Since it would be repetitious and distracting to say "Classic Client/RADE" and "OS X Client/Engine" over and over, those references are simply written "Classic apps" and "OS X apps" with the understanding that we are discussing those specific programs. |
||||||||||||||||||