Tom Vijlbrief has found errors with SVG containing 6-digit translates embedded 
within FOP 0.20.5 (<fo:instream-foreign-object>) (Problem is also relevant for 
1.0).  The SVG renders fine with Batik's squiggle application (shows a 
neighboorhood map.)  

1st attachment -- SVG file (view via Squiggle).
2nd attachment -- FO file (which has above, plus one red & one blue rectangle 
for testing.)
3rd attachment -- (bad) PDF result

For 0.20.5, he has proposed this change to the PDFNumber.java class, which he
believes will accomodate PDFNumber receiving doubles in scientific notation 
(e.g., 1E-04).  (unsure of the validity of this.)

public class PDFNumber {
    static java.text.DecimalFormat myFormatter = new java.text.DecimalFormat
("#.########");
    public static String doubleOut(Double doubleDown) {
        return doubleOut(doubleDown.doubleValue());
    }
    public static String doubleOut(double doubleDown) {
        return myFormatter.format(doubleDown);
    }
    public static String doubleOut(double doubleDown, int dec) {
        return doubleOut(doubleDown);
    }
    ... other methods in 1.0...
}

The new class appears to fix the problem when applied to 0.20.5, however will 
*not* work with nightly build of maintenance (has a different Batik library).  
Nor will it work with 1.0, because of the (even newer) Batik library in HEAD 
(as well as perhaps other reasons, 1.0 being incomplete).

Another possible problem with the above patch is that it neutralizes the third 
method in the class (just calls the second method, # decimal points desired is 
ignored).  I'm unsure how important the third method is to FOP.

4th attachment -- PDF result from 0.20.5 modified with PDFNumber as above.  
Renders well

Thomas DeWeese (Batik) commented on this problem earlier, prior to Tom 
Vijlbrief's patch:
see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=106709286423914&w=2.

Will keep this bug open for 1.0 to ensure that these types of SVG's can be 
generated in the new 1.0 version of FOP.  Also, the rendering is usually worse 
in Acrobat Reader 5.0 vs. AR 6.0, so recommended to make sure changes render 
correctly at least in AR 6.0.