On 01.04.2016, at 18:33, Leonard Rosenthol &lt;lrosenth(a)adobe.com&gt; wrote: Martin – if the documentation that accompanies the ATS talked about the fact that there CAN BE differences between implementation and that that IS acceptable – I’d be fine. That is all I have been asking them to do since 2013 when this whole thing began. Why they refuse to change documentation – not the actual files – just the docs – is beyond me. Leonard From &lt;pdfx-next-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com>> on behalf of Martin Bailey &lt;Martin.Bailey(a)globalgraphics.com <mailto:Martin.Bailey@globalgraphics.com>> Reply-To: &quot;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>" &lt;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>> Date: Friday, April 1, 2016 at 9:57 AM To: &quot;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>" &lt;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>> Cc: "Knape, Bettina (bvdm)" &lt;bk(a)bvdm-online.de <mailto:bk@bvdm-online.de>>, Mailing List WOWG &lt;wowg(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:wowg@lists.callassoftware.com>>, &quot;info(a)ugra.ch <mailto:info@ugra.ch>" &lt;info(a)ugra.ch <mailto:info@ugra.ch>>, &quot;eci(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci@lists.callassoftware.com>" &lt;eci(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci@lists.callassoftware.com>>, Eci-Members &lt;eci-members(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci-members@lists.callassoftware.com>>, Martin Bailey &lt;Martin.Bailey(a)globalgraphics.com <mailto:Martin.Bailey@globalgraphics.com>>, "Mailing List [ECI-EN]" &lt;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>> Subject: Re: [PDFX-next] Altona Test Suite 2.0 Update (2016) Thanks for the clarification, Leonard. You could say the same about the orange/blue spot colours on Altona visual 1.2. But by highlighting a difference between implementations that patch served a very useful purpose and moved the whole industry forward. The same has happened here, leading to the new clause 11 text … or at least it will have happened once we have a suite based on that new clause. Am I right in thinking that when 32000-2 and PDF/X-6 are published, and when a new Altona based on PDF/X-6 is published, your concern on this issue would go away because the new clause 11 removes the potential for other renderings to be regarded as correct? Thanks Martin From: pdfx-next-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com> [mailto:pdfx-next-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com>] On Behalf Of Leonard Rosenthol Sent: 01 April 2016 14:03 To: pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com> Cc: Knape, Bettina (bvdm) &lt;bk(a)bvdm-online.de <mailto:bk@bvdm-online.de>>; Mailing List WOWG &lt;wowg(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:wowg@lists.callassoftware.com>>; info(a)ugra.ch <mailto:info@ugra.ch>; eci(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci@lists.callassoftware.com>; Eci-Members &lt;eci-members(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci-members@lists.callassoftware.com>>; Mailing List [ECI-EN] &lt;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>> Subject: Re: [PDFX-next] Altona Test Suite 2.0 Update (2016) As the 2013 files have “expected output” samples that are NOT THE ONLY valid output, and that the documentation that accompanies the suite as well as the marketing message from the ECI and others, does not reflect this reality (which led to the substantial changes in Clause 11) - I continue to consider the 2013 suite invalid and unusable by the industry. And that message is the one maintained by Adobe verbally and in our software implementation and which we also instruct our OEM vendors (though they are free to customize their implementations as they see fit). At a minimum, (and as we have discussed for 3 years now), ECI should change their documentation and message to reflect that other outputs from the current suite are acceptable as per PDF/X-4 and PDF 1.6. When that happens, I will be glad to publicly change my position. Leonard Rosenthol PDF Architect · Principal Scientist | Adobe Systems Incorporated | p. 408.536.2433 | c. 215.808.4978 | leonardr(a)adobe.com <mailto:leonardr@adobe.com> From: &lt;pdfx-next-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com>> on behalf of Olaf Drümmer &lt;olaf(a)druemmer.com <mailto:olaf@druemmer.com>> Reply-To: &quot;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>" &lt;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>> Date: Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:55 AM To: &quot;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>" &lt;pdfx-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:pdfx-next@lists.callassoftware.com>> Cc: "Knape, Bettina (bvdm)" &lt;bk(a)bvdm-online.de <mailto:bk@bvdm-online.de>>, Mailing List WOWG &lt;wowg(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:wowg@lists.callassoftware.com>>, &quot;info(a)ugra.ch <mailto:info@ugra.ch>" &lt;info(a)ugra.ch <mailto:info@ugra.ch>>, &quot;eci(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci@lists.callassoftware.com>" &lt;eci(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci@lists.callassoftware.com>>, Eci-Members &lt;eci-members(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci-members@lists.callassoftware.com>>, "Mailing List [ECI-EN]" &lt;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com <mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>> Subject: Re: [PDFX-next] Altona Test Suite 2.0 Update (2016) Hi Leonard, as a very clear statement in my role as Chairman of the ECI (and one of the developers of the Altona Test Suite v2): - there is **NOTHING** wrong with the PDF files in Altona Test Suite v2 (neither in the originally published version nor in this 2016 update) - PDF 2.0 is neither (ISO internally) finalized nor published yet; thus there was no reason to even consider making it a PDF 2.0 conforming set of PDF files; Altona Test Suite v2 is still based on PDF/X-4 (and by implication on PDF 1.6) - in terms of expected rendering results of page content on the Technical page of Altona Test Suite v2 involving transparency on the background of the recently (less than two months ago) updated clause “11. Transparency “ in the 3rd DIS of ISO 32000-2, the ECI members who have developed Altona Test Suite v2 have reason to assume that no adjustments in the test pages are or will become necessary In case you disagree with any of this, please submit detailed bug reports and preferably specific test files that prove your point. Thanks, Olaf Drümmer Chairman of the European Color Initiative (ECI) _______________________________________________ PDFX-next mailing list PDFX-next(a)lists.callassoftware.com http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/pdfx-next