Hi Ben,

> I got past this by switching to 1.11

Good to hear that it has been fixed in Java itself.

> Linux seems to have lots of problems with Java IMHO regarding rendering.

That’s true. Many Linux environments seem to ignore (or contradict)
the Java Swing conventions. In the BaseX code, we tried to find
compromise that does justice to both the Java rules and OS settings;
see e.g. [1]. If you want to have a fixed Look and Feel, you can
choose one in the GUI preferences, and you can add the JTattoo library
to your classpath [2].

Hope this helps,

PS: Thanks for the kudos.

[1] https://github.com/BaseXdb/basex/issues/1746
[2] https://docs.basex.org/wiki/Graphical_User_Interface#Look_and_Feel

  For instance, people seem to love that dark theme, but they're not
consistent.  It's very common to have icons that have solid black
foreground with a dark gray background, regardless of what Linux theme
you ask the system to pick.  I'm using Cinnamon, but I'm not sure if
that means I'm also using some flavor of Gnome as well.  Eclipse has
this issue much worse than the BaseX GUI.  If I could only find the
right combination of desktop + Windowing such that I can get the same
Start menu, a desktop with icons, support for normal Linux programs
like Firefox and LibreOffice, networking apps and most importantly,
the ability to have absolutely *no dark theme*, I would be much
happier.  I tried Trinity Desktop Environment, but they apparently
stopped maintenance on it, and little things like the networking app
don't work (important on a laptop), but it looked much more like the
Windows which worked better for me.  In my experience, if it doesn't
work out of the box, changing the theme doesn't fully work.  If you
read this, thank you for listening; I hope someone has a
> Separately, I recently started a web site, but am shocked at how easy it is 
> to get something to work on BaseX.  Adding a restful service was as simple as 
> creating an XQuery module.  Amazingly, the system actually found the service 
> without a hassle.  I made absolutely no configuration files to get this to 
> work.  Even if I wanted to attach security to the service, that seems to be 
> as easy as adding an extra decorator to the service.  I'm sure there's things 
> I'm missing, but again, whoever put this software together did a phenomenal 
> job towards making this easy to use.
> Kind Regards,
> Ben

Reply via email to