Hi,
I am planning on using Aspose in one of our projects. All the pdf forms that have been created are using the Livecycle designer 7.0. I would like to merge XML data with the PDF and created a separately filled PDF. This Aspose component seems perfect for this. But here are my questions:
1. How should I save my PDF form in the designer? The options I have are:
a. Static PDf
b. Dynamic PDF
c. Acobat 6.0 PDF
Does it matter?
2. I realize that the form field names are in the XFA format f1[0]… etc. IS there any thing else that I need to take care of?
3. Livecycle 7 also has support for “Image Fields”. These are dynamic images which can be filled via XML imports. How does Aspose support this? Does it treat it like a standard image field?
4. Is there any thing in a 7.0 designer generated form that Aspose does not support?
thx,
LR
Dear LR,
Thanks for considering Aspose.Pdf.Form.
1) XFA in 7.0 designer has not been supported in current version.
2) If you want to use Aspose.Pdf.Form, you could use “Tools->Advanced editing” to create Acro Form to replace the xfa form temporally,which is also very useful.
3) Image field has been supported but it is not well compatible with 7.0. After support to 7.0, it will be ok.
4) We have planned to support it in the next version, about the end of this month.
Best regards.
Hi Ken,
Is it possible to manually parse a XFA based data xml file and then use Aspose to fill the form as long as the field names are in the 7.0 format. That should be doable right?
If that is doable what should I save the file as dynamic pdf, static pdf or acrobat 6.0 pdf?
Can the same be done for “image fields” as well?
thx,
LR
Dear LR,
1)It seems that you needn’t use xfa form. If this is right, you absolutely use acro form to replace it. The key problem is not the data source, but the template pdf is created by 7.0 with xfa. If the template pdf is not xfa form, all is ok.
2)You’d better save it as acrobat 6.0 pdf. But I have tested, it also does not display well in 7.0 after filled by Aspose.Pdf.Form.
3) An “image field” is implemented as a “button” field in current version.
Best regards.