Official sources reviewed
| Primary source | What it establishes | Review date |
|---|---|---|
| PptxGenJS text API | Published positioning and sizing controls for a coordinate-oriented comparison point. | 2026-07-22 |
What this decision is actually about
This is the page for teams whose generated slides already work until the content gets a little longer, the chart title wraps, or the bullet list grows. That is when coordinate-based generation turns into maintenance.
Evaluation prompts—not a feature scorecard
| Alternative boundary | Confirm the supported input, deployment, and output behavior in the official source above using your current version. |
| Runstamp boundary | Prove one real artifact locally first; local package behavior does not imply hosted access. |
| Delivery decision | Test the native file, recipient handoff, and release check that matter in your product. |
When Runstamp is the better fit
Choose Runstamp when layout drift is already costing engineering time or when the same template has to survive real variation in the payload.
When manual coordinate libraries is the better fit
If slide structures are completely fixed and the content never varies in length, coordinate-first libraries may be sufficient.
Cost of choosing Runstamp
A layout engine is more opinionated. Teams with truly fixed-layout decks may find the extra abstraction unnecessary — but most teams underestimate how quickly content starts varying.
Evaluate the file your customer receives.
Bring one real payload, its expected file, and the release check you cannot miss. Pro and Platform are self-serve; contact us when the evaluation requires Enterprise terms or architecture review.