On 15.08.2005 14:38:41 Manuel Mall wrote: > On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 08:20 pm, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > On 15.08.2005 14:04:16 Manuel Mall wrote: > > > On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 06:43 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36082 > > > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-15 > > > > The URI Resolution does not yet affect URIs in Batik. > > > > > > Hmm, I do set the baseURL when processing a SVG e-g. Do you have an > > > example? > > > > This is actually not about relative paths, but actual URI resolution. > > If you look at the JUnit test case I committed earlier  I use the > > URIResolver to resolve an URI "funky:myimage123" to one of the bgimg > > bitmaps in our test directory (a file URL). That's how people can > > specify abstract URIs instead of concrete URLs to point to resources > > whose location is not known at deployment time. And it's where XML > > Commons Resolver jumps in to provide a widely used mapping from URIs > > to URLs. > > > >  http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=232788&view=rev > > > Alright, this means we need to set the FOP resolver on the SVG > processor. Not sure if Batik supports the > javax.xml.transform.URIResolver interface. May be any Batik people > lurking on this list can shed more light on this?
Now, I'm not so sure either. I remembered seeing a URIResolver in Batik but it turns out that this is something specific to Batik. Anyway, that particular feature is not that important right now. I'm sure Thomas will still have a good idea how to do that. But I guess it will be good to have a consistent URI handling over XSL-FO and SVG in the long run. <snip/> Jeremias Maerki