J.Pietschmann wrote:

> Victor Mote wrote:
> > Is it safe to assume that all *n*x
> > platforms have or could get an X environment?
> No. This is a FAQ.

Sorry. I have seen "headless server" postings go by, but it meant nothing to

> Well, FOP is already so tightly integrated with Batik that it wont run
> without X or PJA. However, I suspect that talking an ISP/ASP into
> installing
> additional fonts will be more often a major PITA than not, and this
> could easily be seen as significant drawback of the "use the system fonts"
> approach. And if I were a server provider, I'd be uneasy with customers
> dragging in heaps of fonts I have to install and manage. Apart from the
> potential to have clashes, getting the X font subsystem to perform with
> lots of fonts apparently requires some rather arcane knowledge.

Good point, and one that I would not have thought of working in a standalone
& static environment. The question then becomes whether 1) FOP should
dictate to the end-user that it can only use registered fonts, or 2) the
end-user's environment limitations should dictate to FOP that it must build
yet another independent font registry system. I am OK with either one, but I
think it is good to ask the question before proceeding, as the ripple effect
of this decision seems significant. If 99% of ISP/ASP users are using only
fonts that would be on their server, or if we don't mind telling them that
they should (or use an in-house server, or get the ISP to install the fonts,
or ...), then maybe we come to a different decision. How do the other
implementations handle this issue? I definitely don't intend to be
argumentative here. I may be the odd man out, as the axis that we are
concerned with has less to do with servers & performance than typographical

Victor Mote

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to