On 09.03.2005 12:51:11 Renaud Richardet wrote: > I downloaded sun's codecs [2] that Oleg used in his TIFFRenderer. > Jeremias, you mean that we can legally just put those in the FOP-code?
This would have to be checked out. I'd rather not, especially when we have PNG and TIFF codecs under Apache license already available. > Following codecs are included in [2]: > - TIFF > - JPEG > - PNG > - BMP > So it should be possible to create a renderer for each of this file > formats. But do we need them all? > Do we also need GIF encoding ([2] only supports GIF decoding) . If > yes, we'll have to use other libraries like ACME Labs GIF encoder > (right?) I would like to suggest that you implement TIFF and PNG output using Batik's codecs. > Besides, I haven't understand yet if Oleg will donate his code to Apache. I have the impression that he wants to. There are simply a few issues to look at. Looking at possible licensing issue I'd suggest Oleg simply donates his own classes (not the codec) to the FOP project by applying the Apache license and posting them as a Bugzilla issue. You can then use these classes to implement output via Batik's codecs. Or you simply reimplement the same functionality without copy/paste. :-) As he said, it's only a thin wrapper. The key is to have codecs with the right licensing. > > Otherwise, I'd rather use ImageIO even if it's only available in JDKs > > >=1.4. > I thought FOP should be 1.3 compilant [3]? So how do we go around that? That's right. But nothing stops us from providing additional code that's JDK 1.4 dependent as long as it's not core functionality and it's in a separate directory (src/java-1.4). > Regards, > Renaud > > [3] http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgId=1332332 Jeremias Maerki
