after someone reported having troubles with my little XWeb program (http://xweb.sf.net) and rendering SVGs on a 1.4.2 JDK on Linux, I tried upgrading to Batik 1.5. This seems to fix the problem with empty results which were reported, but unfortunately the looks of some buttons rendered for one of my sites (http://tockit.sf.net) change quite a bit.
Since I added the Batik version to XWeb before I figured out that one should keep track of version numbers I can't tell the version of Batik I used before -- according to CVS it must be about 17 month old. Here are some comparisons of PNGs rendered with that Batik, with Batik 1.5 and the SVG used to create them (kind of -- it is what XWeb would generate). Total file size is less than 11kb.
Example one: - http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~pbecker/batik/overview_old.png - http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~pbecker/batik/overview_1_5.png - http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~pbecker/batik/overview.svg
This one looks pretty much the same to the old version in Adobe's viewer.
Example two: - http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~pbecker/batik/docco_old.png - http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~pbecker/batik/docco_1_5.png - http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~pbecker/batik/docco.svg
This SVG actually could be better -- at least Adobe's viewer doesn't really like it.
Any explanation for this problem? Anything I can do to avoid it? If it is a bug -- any hints were to dig in the code?
BTW: it still seems the gamma problem I have is still around. If you look at http://tockit.sf.net with Internet Explorer you will notice that the navigation PNGs are of a slightly different colour than the surrounding bits and pieces. I tracked that down once to the gamma value in the PNGs which seems to be ignored by most software but IE (e.g. the site looks good in Mozilla). Is there any new insight on how to avoid that problem?
Thanks, Peter
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
