- Actually support *linked* test-cases in the integration-tests (in the same way as the unit-tests).
- Add a new `"type": "other"`-kind to the test-manifest, to support *linked* test-cases in the unit/integration-tests without requiring the PDF document in question to also be a reference-test.
The rotation handling that's currently living in `PDFViewerApplication` is *very* old, and pre-dates the introduction of the viewer components by years.
As can be seen in the `BaseViewer.pagesRotation` setter, we're not actually normalizing the rotation as intended and instead rely on the caller to handle that correctly. This is first of all inconsistent, given how other setters are implemented, and secondly it could also lead to the rotation being set to a value outside of the `[0, 360)`-range.
Finally, for improved consistency the rotation handling in `PageViewport` is updated similarly. Please note that this case, it's *not* changing the pre-existing logic.
This improves and simplifies #13102 in order to make printing of test-cases
like the one in bug 1698414 (where the real page is bigger than the target
page) much better, see incoming screenshots.
The reason why we need to stop setting .style.width / .style.height is to get
the right auto-sizing behavior in both axes. This shouldn't change behavior as
long as the print resolution is >= the CSS resolution, which seems like a
reasonable assumption.
If you try to print with a lower resolution than CSS, then instead of an
stretched canvas, you'd get a centered CSS-quality canvas, which seems
sensible. This could maybe be fixed with some CSS hackery (some combination of
min / max and viewport units perhaps?), but I think it's more trouble than it's
worth.
- implement few positioning properties: position, width, height, anchor;
- implement font element;
- implement fill element (used by font) and its children (linear, radial, ...);
- font property is inherited from ancestor container (see https://www.pdfa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/XFA-3_3.pdf#page=43) so let CSS handles that stuff;
- in order to reduce the number of properties to set, only set non default properties and put the default in CSS;
- set a background to some containers to be able to see them (will be removed in a future commit).
The intention, in PR 12493, was that the page we're adding to the browser history should behave as if it were a "regular" internal destination (to properly convey user intent).
Unfortunately, since I didn't consider all the edge-cases correctly, it ended up behaving like a URL-hash instead which obviously wasn't intended. Note that currently this isn't a problem, however it can become an issue (in some cases) with upcoming re-factoring around `PDFHistory` and OpenAction support[1].
---
[1] I've started working on fixing the following TODO, which will require a couple of smaller tweaks here and there: 9d0ce6e79f/web/app.js (L1680-L1681)
In the `getAll`-method, we can have just one *explicit* loop rather than two indirect ones via the old `Object.assign`-call.
Also, changes the `get`-method to be slightly more compact (while keeping the logic intact).
Looking at this now, I cannot understand why we'd need to initialize `this.prefs` with all of the values from `this.defaults`.
Not only does this *indirectly* require one extra loop, via the `Object.assign`-call, but it also means that in GENERIC-builds changes to default-preference values might not be picked-up unless the the existing user-prefs are cleared (if the user had *manually* set prefs previously).
I'm adding these temporary l10n strings, so that I don't have to stare at a bunch of warning messages in the web-console when using the development viewer.
Given that the `enableXfa` parameter must to be passed to the API/Worker, and thus included in the `getDocument` call, it's not necessary to include it when initializing the `PDFViewer`-instance used in the default viewer. (Also, in `AppOptions`, the parameter is clearly marked with `OptionKind.API`.)
Furthermore, we probably don't want to display the fallback bar (in Firefox) for XFA documents when `enableXfa = true` is set.
While it's still not entirely clear if this would've prevented the issue as reported, given that the particular use-case reported apparently no longer applies, this small change really cannot hurt in general *and* it won't effect "regular" viewer builds in any way.
Given how the compatibility-values are being handled, it's not actually possible to override a *truthy* default-value with a *falsy* compatibility-value.
This is a simple oversight on my part, and with modern ECMAScript features this is very easy to support.
With the changes made in the previous patch, we can now list "disableTelemetry" in the `AppOptions` only for the `CHROME`-builds and thus remove the special-casing in the `checkChromePreferencesFile` helper function.
Currently there's a lot of duplication in the `buildLib` and `buildDefaultPreferences` functions, which seem quite unfortunate. Hence this patch extracts the common functionality in a new `buildLibHelper` function instead.
Originally the default preferences where simply placed in a JSON-file, checked into the repository, which over time became impractical, annoying, and error-prone to maintain; please see PR 10548.
While that improved the overall situation a fair bit, it however inherited one quite unfortunate property of the old JSON-based solution[1]: It's still not possible for *different* build targets to specify their *own* default preference values.
With some preferences, such as e.g. `enableScripting`, it's not inconceivable that you'd want to (at least) support build-specific default preference values. Currently that's not really possible, which is why this PR re-factors the default preferences generation to support this.
---
[1] This fact isn't really clear from the `AppOptions` implementation, unless you're familiar with the `gulpfile.js` code, which could lead to some confusion for those new to this part of the code-base.
A number of the currently supported *scripting* events only make sense in the "normal" viewer mode, and not when PresentationMode is active. For example:
- Changing the zoom-level will outright break rendering in PresentationMode, since it relies on "page-fit" being used.
- Focusing a particular (AcroForm) element won't work, and could break keyboard navigation, since forms should not be editable in PresentationMode (see issue 12232).
While this will perhaps not be perfect for *every* PDF document with mixed page orientation, based on the large number of bugs/issues seen over the years I'm however pretty convinced that it'll be an overall improvement in a majority of cases.
In order to improve things further, we'd probably need Firefox to support e.g. `@page` such that the viewer can provide better information to the print engine.
Currently, with `enablePrintAutoRotate = true` set, we're forced to loop through all the pages *twice* when checking for any landscape pages.
This seems completely unnecessary now, and using only *one* loop should be marginally more efficient in general.
Currently landscape pages are rotated *clockwise*, which for most documents feel wrong since holding the printed pages at their *left* edge causes the landscape pages to be viewed "upside down".
In general, since most documents are LTR ones, it feels more appropriate to instead rotate landscape pages *counterclockwise* for printing.
Similar to the existing `annotationsPromise` and `_jsActionsPromise` properties, the new `_xfaPromise` should obviously also be reset, since otherwise you might end up holding onto a lot of data for pages that are no longer active.
(That caching wasn't present in the original version of PR 13069, which is why I didn't spot it until now.)
