You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Eric SCHAEFFER <es...@posterconseil.com> on 2000/02/01 07:11:53 UTC
We should do something
Hi,
I haven't enought time, and I'm very hurry (my Web site should be in
production next monday : glurps). But I very very want to do something for
FOP. There haven't been improvements for a while.
The new XSL spec has changed a lot. I think that the code should also be
cleaned up (lot of things done twice).
As I want to do something, I want to know who work on what, what should be
done first, and what do we decide for images.
JAI seems to need Java2. If we stay with old JVM, we should use Jimi.
I think that when we use external classes (like JAI or Jimi), it should be
able to be configured in a file, like Cocoon does. The Cocoon way of doing
this is very pretty. Easy to use, for users and for developpers (changes are
easier to make).
For images, we should be able to configure what type of image is handle by
what class. I can do it if you want.
My Jimi implementation is ready (but I'd like people to test it).
If we do it this way, we could then change for JAI just changing the
properties file.
What do you think ?
Eric.
_______________________________________
Eric SCHAEFFER
eschaeffer@posterconseil.com
POSTER CONSEIL
118 rue de Tocqueville
75017 PARIS
FRANCE
Tel. : 33-140541058
Fax : 33-140541059
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation Conference!
-----------------------------------
http://ApacheCon.Com ------------------------------------
_______________________________________
Re: We should do something
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Eric SCHAEFFER wrote:
>
> > JAI requires Java 2 for sure... It's almost impossible working with
> > images on Platform 1.1. I've taken a look at JIMI, and it has a main
> > problem: the license. It cannot be redistributed in any way, and it may
> > be removed from Sun's site anytime... I think we should contact the
> > authors...
>
> Glurps, I didn't check this...
Too bad :( The license says that is for development use only.... And
cannot be redistributed or transfered. While for JAI we can...
> > I didn't follow the discussion. What are you using JIMI for???
>
> Hum, just to be able to read images whatever is its file format...
> (I'm not found of playing with bits)
Ah... Well, the JVM already support quite a bunch of formats in input
(at least GIF, JPG and PNG if I'm not wrong)... Do we need more?
Pier
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- P I E R -
stable structure erected over water to allow the docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- ApacheCON Y2K: Come to the official Apache developers conference -
-------------------- <http://www.apachecon.com> --------------------
Re: We should do something
Posted by Eric SCHAEFFER <es...@posterconseil.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>
To: <fo...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: We should do something
> Eric SCHAEFFER wrote:
> >
> > JAI seems to need Java2. If we stay with old JVM, we should use Jimi.
> > I think that when we use external classes (like JAI or Jimi), it should
be
> > able to be configured in a file, like Cocoon does. The Cocoon way of
doing
> > this is very pretty. Easy to use, for users and for developpers (changes
are
> > easier to make).
>
> JAI requires Java 2 for sure... It's almost impossible working with
> images on Platform 1.1. I've taken a look at JIMI, and it has a main
> problem: the license. It cannot be redistributed in any way, and it may
> be removed from Sun's site anytime... I think we should contact the
> authors...
>
Glurps, I didn't check this...
> > For images, we should be able to configure what type of image is handle
by
> > what class. I can do it if you want.
>
> That's a MUST, IMVHO... Expecially given the status of Jimi from sun...
>
I'm going to do it.
>
> > My Jimi implementation is ready (but I'd like people to test it).
> > If we do it this way, we could then change for JAI just changing the
> > properties file.
>
> I didn't follow the discussion. What are you using JIMI for???
>
Hum, just to be able to read images whatever is its file format...
(I'm not found of playing with bits)
> Pier
>
Eric
_______________________________________
Eric SCHAEFFER
eschaeffer@posterconseil.com
POSTER CONSEIL
118 rue de Tocqueville
75017 PARIS
FRANCE
Tel. : 33-140541058
Fax : 33-140541059
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation Conference!
-----------------------------------
http://ApacheCon.Com ------------------------------------
_______________________________________
Re: We should do something
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Eric SCHAEFFER wrote:
>
> JAI seems to need Java2. If we stay with old JVM, we should use Jimi.
> I think that when we use external classes (like JAI or Jimi), it should be
> able to be configured in a file, like Cocoon does. The Cocoon way of doing
> this is very pretty. Easy to use, for users and for developpers (changes are
> easier to make).
JAI requires Java 2 for sure... It's almost impossible working with
images on Platform 1.1. I've taken a look at JIMI, and it has a main
problem: the license. It cannot be redistributed in any way, and it may
be removed from Sun's site anytime... I think we should contact the
authors...
> For images, we should be able to configure what type of image is handle by
> what class. I can do it if you want.
That's a MUST, IMVHO... Expecially given the status of Jimi from sun...
> My Jimi implementation is ready (but I'd like people to test it).
> If we do it this way, we could then change for JAI just changing the
> properties file.
I didn't follow the discussion. What are you using JIMI for???
Pier
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- P I E R -
stable structure erected over water to allow the docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- ApacheCON Y2K: Come to the official Apache developers conference -
-------------------- <http://www.apachecon.com> --------------------
Re: We should do something
Posted by Eric SCHAEFFER <es...@posterconseil.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: Arved Sandstrom <Ar...@chebucto.ns.ca>
To: <fo...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: We should do something
> At 07:11 AM 2/1/00 +0100, Eric Schaeffer wrote:
> >The new XSL spec has changed a lot. I think that the code should also be
> >cleaned up (lot of things done twice).
> >
> We may be at that point. I know James has not been overly concerned about
> performance so far, during development, which is reasonable. But I don't
> think that effort taken at any time to optimize will be taken amiss.
> Certainly seeking compliance with the latest XSL is top priority.
>
When I say cleaning the code, it's not a matter of performance. Several
things are done twice, and it make the code more complex to understand...
> >As I want to do something, I want to know who work on what, what should
be
> >done first, and what do we decide for images.
> >
> I have my new computer up and running, Windows and Linux, so if I can get
> set up as a CVS committer then I can pursue links more aggressively.
>
+1
> >JAI seems to need Java2. If we stay with old JVM, we should use Jimi.
> >I think that when we use external classes (like JAI or Jimi), it should
be
> >able to be configured in a file, like Cocoon does. The Cocoon way of
doing
> >this is very pretty. Easy to use, for users and for developpers (changes
are
> >easier to make).
> >For images, we should be able to configure what type of image is handle
by
> >what class. I can do it if you want.
> >My Jimi implementation is ready (but I'd like people to test it).
> >If we do it this way, we could then change for JAI just changing the
> >properties file.
> >
> Well, I agree with all of this. External libraries of this sort ought not
> to be hardwired if we can help it.
I can create the configuration system.
>
> Arved Sandstrom
>
>
Eric.
_______________________________________
Eric SCHAEFFER
eschaeffer@posterconseil.com
POSTER CONSEIL
118 rue de Tocqueville
75017 PARIS
FRANCE
Tel. : 33-140541058
Fax : 33-140541059
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation Conference!
-----------------------------------
http://ApacheCon.Com ------------------------------------
Re: We should do something
Posted by Arved Sandstrom <Ar...@chebucto.ns.ca>.
At 07:11 AM 2/1/00 +0100, Eric Schaeffer wrote:
>The new XSL spec has changed a lot. I think that the code should also be
>cleaned up (lot of things done twice).
>
We may be at that point. I know James has not been overly concerned about
performance so far, during development, which is reasonable. But I don't
think that effort taken at any time to optimize will be taken amiss.
Certainly seeking compliance with the latest XSL is top priority.
>As I want to do something, I want to know who work on what, what should be
>done first, and what do we decide for images.
>
I have my new computer up and running, Windows and Linux, so if I can get
set up as a CVS committer then I can pursue links more aggressively.
>JAI seems to need Java2. If we stay with old JVM, we should use Jimi.
>I think that when we use external classes (like JAI or Jimi), it should be
>able to be configured in a file, like Cocoon does. The Cocoon way of doing
>this is very pretty. Easy to use, for users and for developpers (changes are
>easier to make).
>For images, we should be able to configure what type of image is handle by
>what class. I can do it if you want.
>My Jimi implementation is ready (but I'd like people to test it).
>If we do it this way, we could then change for JAI just changing the
>properties file.
>
Well, I agree with all of this. External libraries of this sort ought not
to be hardwired if we can help it.
Arved Sandstrom
RE: We should do something
Posted by Bill Raudabaugh <bi...@infomentum.com>.
+1 to upgrade FOP to the latest spec. Consider me a resource to help with
this.
Bill
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Eric SCHAEFFER [mailto:eschaeffer@posterconseil.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 1:12 AM
>To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
>Subject: We should do something
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I haven't enought time, and I'm very hurry (my Web site should be in
>production next monday : glurps). But I very very want to do something for
>FOP. There haven't been improvements for a while.
>
>The new XSL spec has changed a lot. I think that the code should also be
>cleaned up (lot of things done twice).
>
>As I want to do something, I want to know who work on what, what should be
>done first, and what do we decide for images.
>
>JAI seems to need Java2. If we stay with old JVM, we should use Jimi.
>I think that when we use external classes (like JAI or Jimi), it should be
>able to be configured in a file, like Cocoon does. The Cocoon way of doing
>this is very pretty. Easy to use, for users and for developpers
>(changes are
>easier to make).
>For images, we should be able to configure what type of image is handle by
>what class. I can do it if you want.
>My Jimi implementation is ready (but I'd like people to test it).
>If we do it this way, we could then change for JAI just changing the
>properties file.
>
>What do you think ?
>
>Eric.
>
>
>_______________________________________
>
>Eric SCHAEFFER
>eschaeffer@posterconseil.com
>
>POSTER CONSEIL
>118 rue de Tocqueville
>75017 PARIS
>FRANCE
>Tel. : 33-140541058
>Fax : 33-140541059
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>-----------------------------
> Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation Conference!
>-----------------------------------
>http://ApacheCon.Com ------------------------------------
>_______________________________________
>
>
>
>