On 8 September 2011 21:10, Greg Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > Again, I don't personally see any value in doing this. There is no issue in > having a dependency on the SVG JARs, either from a licensing or deployment > perspective, and you'd only be saving a single class (Drawing) in the WTK > JAR. You'd need to add it to another JAR, which will probably *increase* > download size slightly. Finally, as I mentioned, you'll lose the ability to > specify SVG files in markup: > > <ImageView image="@foo.svg"/> > > So this gets a big -1 from me.
I have only scanned this thread quickly and haven't examined the code, but couldn't the SVG stuff be moved into a separate JAR as Sandro suggested, after modifying the relevant BXMLSerializer/Image/Drawing/whatever classes to find the SVG jar via Pivot/Java service loaders?
