--- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A veto would have been easier. :-) I would simply > have stopped and said: > "Sigh. Again. Ok, next task." >
Yes, but the change proposed simply doesn't rise to the level of a veto. > Would it be more interesting/agreeable if we would > leave the render.awt > package and create an AWTRenderer that is optimized > for embedding into > AWT/Swing applications? Close. How about this: AWTRenderer is just for our pop-up AWT/Swing window with the document in the middle. It will extend an (abstract?) Java2DRenderer, and will not really be meant to be extended or modified by other users. Java2DRenderer, OTOH, is what is used for others for embedding into AWT/Swing applications. AWTRenderer, in addition to being our own native renderer, will be an excellent example of how to extend Java2DRenderer in the user's own programs. Simplest use case: someone wants Java2D output but doesn't like our AWTRenderer. Wants to add some buttons, remove others from the window, do 400 other things. They will extend the Java2DRenderer to embed this technology into their own work. By way of analogy: AWTRenderer = Squiggle Java2DRenderer = Whatever Batik does to allow other users to create their own Squiggle apps. (Sorry, I don't know Batik! ;) WDYT? Glen
