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 Dalibor Topic <ro...@kaffe.org> on 2004/10/01 15:31:15 UTC
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Glen Mazza wrote:
> --- Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch> wrote:
>
>>Why are you so keen on removing stuff? I'd be more
>>concerned about
>>adding the stuff that's missing for an initial
>>release.
>
>
> Just cleaning up for the next release.
>
>
>>Jimi works fine
>>for some people. No reason to remove this.
>>
>
>
> OK, so it does work for the Java 2 platform. We'll
> keep it then.
I haven't been following the developments very closely, so this may
sound like a stupid question: does that mean that FOP HEAD now works
nicely with PNGs without JIMI? Has the code from Batik been merged in,
or has another solution emerged?
cheers,
dalibor topic
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
If you got a long breath, yes. We're are still a few months from a
release. The layout code is in the process of being completely rewritten,
so many features available in 0.20.5 are still missing.
On 01.10.2004 17:10:34 Dalibor Topic wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need
> > either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next FOP
> > version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're
> > stuck, though.
>
> thanks for the quick responce, Jeremias. I'm going to be a bit involved
> with Fedora documentation project's attempt to build up their toolchain
> using FOP on GNU Classpath based runtimes[1], so I'm glad to hear that
> there is a chance of having PNG work out of the box in the next release.
>
> My initial experiments with Kaffe & FOP a while ago have been
> encouraging. I am considering spending some time getting FOP to work on
> gcj, Kaffe and other runtimes, as I'd like to use it to generate man
> pages for kaffe using kaffe, among other things. I assume HEAD is the
> best place to start for an interested developer?
>
> cheers,
> dalibor topic
>
> [1] And with debian's efforts to get FOP into main.
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Posted by Clay Leeds <cl...@medata.com>.
On Oct 1, 2004, at 2:30 PM, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> On 01.10.2004 18:06:13 Clay Leeds wrote:
>> Please clarify:
>> As the Subject implies, Glen's original message indicated he wanted to
>> remove Jimi (I understand that won't be the case now). He said nothing
>> of removing JAI, and as far as I understand, FOP-1.0 will still need
>> JAI for PNG support (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> Nobody talks about removing JAI support.
Just wanted to be sure... I saw the following and was confused:
On Oct 1, 2004, at 6:39 AM, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need
> either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next
> FOP
> version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're
> stuck, though.
"But it may well be that the next FOP will support PNG without an
additional library."
>> Will JAI be required by FOP-1.0 for PNG and also be required for some
>> subformats of TIFF[1]?
>
> Yes, except that we can use the ImageIO API from JDK 1.4 and later.
> But in the end ImageIO also uses JAI codecs to support the different
> formats. We could also have another look at open source codecs to
> support PNG and TIFF etc.
>
> Jeremias Maerki
Maybe the idea of adding open source codecs is what you were referring
to. Thanks for the response...
Web Maestro Clay
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
On 01.10.2004 18:06:13 Clay Leeds wrote:
> Please clarify:
> As the Subject implies, Glen's original message indicated he wanted to
> remove Jimi (I understand that won't be the case now). He said nothing
> of removing JAI, and as far as I understand, FOP-1.0 will still need
> JAI for PNG support (please correct me if I'm wrong).
Nobody talks about removing JAI support.
> Will JAI be required by FOP-1.0 for PNG and also be required for some
> subformats of TIFF[1]?
Yes, except that we can use the ImageIO API from JDK 1.4 and later.
But in the end ImageIO also uses JAI codecs to support the different
formats. We could also have another look at open source codecs to
support PNG and TIFF etc.
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Posted by Clay Leeds <cl...@medata.com>.
On Oct 1, 2004, at 6:39 AM, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need
> either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next
> FOP
> version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're
> stuck, though.
<snip>
> Jeremias Maerki
Please clarify:
As the Subject implies, Glen's original message indicated he wanted to
remove Jimi (I understand that won't be the case now). He said nothing
of removing JAI, and as far as I understand, FOP-1.0 will still need
JAI for PNG support (please correct me if I'm wrong).
Will JAI be required by FOP-1.0 for PNG and also be required for some
subformats of TIFF[1]?
Web Maestro Clay
[1]
http://xml.apache.org/fop/graphics.html#tiff
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Posted by Dalibor Topic <ro...@kaffe.org>.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need
> either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next FOP
> version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're
> stuck, though.
thanks for the quick responce, Jeremias. I'm going to be a bit involved
with Fedora documentation project's attempt to build up their toolchain
using FOP on GNU Classpath based runtimes[1], so I'm glad to hear that
there is a chance of having PNG work out of the box in the next release.
My initial experiments with Kaffe & FOP a while ago have been
encouraging. I am considering spending some time getting FOP to work on
gcj, Kaffe and other runtimes, as I'd like to use it to generate man
pages for kaffe using kaffe, among other things. I assume HEAD is the
best place to start for an interested developer?
cheers,
dalibor topic
[1] And with debian's efforts to get FOP into main.
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need
either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next FOP
version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're
stuck, though.
On 01.10.2004 15:31:15 Dalibor Topic wrote:
> I haven't been following the developments very closely, so this may
> sound like a stupid question: does that mean that FOP HEAD now works
> nicely with PNGs without JIMI? Has the code from Batik been merged in,
> or has another solution emerged?
Jeremias Maerki