In conjunction with "print document with annotations", I can sign a document and send it via email, without the sequence: print - manually sign - scan.

On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 11:34:02AM -0000, albert wrote:
Hej,

> Make possible to add arbitrary images (png, tiff, jpeg, svg, ...) to the collection of stamps.

I think that doesn't make sense. If we really will come to the point
where we can save back annotations to a PDF document, we have to stay
compatible with the PDF definitions of stamp annotations. And there is
no way of storing a custom image stamp...

Ciao,
Tobias

I am a bit confused about this wish. 

Is the requirement to just add some kind of image to the document, or to really do some kind of digital signature with arbitrary indications of signature?

It may be possible to produce an arbitrary signature: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/PPKAppearances.pdf

This wish is too open to be implementable though (and supporting signatures is likely to be very messy). If the original reporter can write up a more detailed description of what is required (and ideally how it fits into a higher level workflow), we could reconsider it.

> I think that doesn't make sense. If we really will come to the point
> where we can save back annotations to a PDF document, we have to stay
> compatible with the PDF definitions of stamp annotations. And there is
> no way of storing a custom image stamp...

This is false!
PDF Reference, Sixth Edition, version 1.7 (http://www.adobe.com/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/pdf_reference_1-7.pdf), page 635 states:
a rubber stamp annotation (PDF 1.3) displays text or graphics intended to look as if they were stamped on the page with a rubber stamp.
The annotation dictionary entries specific to this type of annotation are:

KEY     		TYPE 		VALUE

Subtype 		name 		(Required) The type of annotation that this dictionary describes; must be Stamp
             				for a rubber stamp annotation.

Name 		name 		(Optional) The name of an icon to be used in displaying the annotation. Viewer
          				applications should provide predefined icon appearances for at least the follow-
          				ing standard names:
             				   Approved		Experimental		NotApproved
         				   AsIs			Expired			NotForPublicRelease
          				   Confidential		Final			Sold
          				   Departmental		ForComment		TopSecret
          				   Draft			ForPublicRelease
          				Additional names may be supported as well. Default value: Draft.
          				Note: The annotation dictionary’s AP entry, if present, takes precedence over the
          				Name entry; see Table 8.15 on page 606 and Section 8.4.4, “Appearance Streams.”
	
As you can see from the table, the aspect of stamp is specified by a Name entry or by an AP entry (that takes precedence over the Name entry). For the moment, okular provides only 4 symbols (okular, kde, bookmark, information), no one of them may be "safely" associated to the standard names reported in the specifications. The AP entry is an appearance dictionary specifying how the annotation is
presented visually on the page. The entries of a appearance dictionary are:

KEY 		TYPE                 		VALUE

N   		stream or dictionary 	(Required) The annotation’s normal appearance.

R   		stream or dictionary 	(Optional) The annotation’s rollover appearance. Default value: the value of
                         				the N entry.

D   		stream or dictionary 	(Optional) The annotation’s down appearance. Default value: the value of the
                         				N entry.

As you can see, the appearance of the annotation in this case is described by a stream and so may well contain an arbitrary image or text.
The AP mechanism is very important because even when okular will offer a symbol for each standard name they will be simply not enought for the generic user necessities.

Ciao...

With Adobe Acrobat Professional it is possible to create custom stamps, see:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Acrobat/8.0/Professional/WS58a04a822e3e50102bd615109794195ff-7e67.html

I agree with the OP.  Even if the stampt tool was not used as a digital signature, it is extremely convenient to be able to use an image of my handwritten signature to eliminate the paper trail.

For example, I have to submit a receipt with a signed agreement for my dependent care flexible spending account in order to receive reimbursement for my child's daycare.  Every two weeks, I must print out the document from my provider's website, sign it, scan it and either fax it to them or upload it as a PDF.

The ability to stamp my signature on the file electronically gets rid of the printing and scanning steps. It could be implemented by being able to select PNG images as sources for the stamp image or something.

Whether or not the stamp represents a "digital signature" is irrelevant to this bug.

By the way, just being able to add simple annotations is a big step for PDFs in the Linux world.  Thank you!  I look forward to future development in Okular;it looks quite promising.

There is a way now to add a custom image (svg, png) to a stamp (description here -> http://wiki.ubuntuusers.de/Okular)
With "Save as.." it is even possible to write annotations down to the PDF-file. 

Unfortunately, those notifocations are not shown by common PDF Viewers  (Adobe Reader, PDF-Master,...) Neither it is possible to print them to a new PDf File (which seems to work just for text-annotations)

(In reply to kdebug from comment #8)
> There is a way now to add a custom image (svg, png) to a stamp (description
> here -> http://wiki.ubuntuusers.de/Okular)
> With "Save as.." it is even possible to write annotations down to the
> PDF-file. 
> 
> Unfortunately, those notifications are not shown by common PDF Viewers 
> (Adobe Reader, PDF-Master,...) Neither it is possible to print them to a new
> PDf File (which seems to work just for text-annotations)
I agree. Just the same with Okular 0.24 (under OpenSuSE) : the stamp is really included in the exported PDF file (whose size grows), but in a special manner, which isn't compatible with Adobe Reader.
Hopefully one will find how to fix that ...

Yes, as you've discovered, the feature requested in this bug report has since been implemented, but a way that other viewers don't see it. That's tracked by https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383651

*** Bug 354894 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 383652 ***